Dataset Information

Association of Multiple Hospital Affiliations With Clinician Service Use, Breadth of Procedures, and Costs.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Little is known about whether a clinician having multiple hospital affiliations (ie, 1 clinician working across multiple teams and organizations) is associated with clinician practice style and cost. The measurement of this association requires adjusting for selection into multihospital affiliations based on both observable and unobservable clinician characteristics.

Objective

To evaluate the association of multiple hospital affiliations with clinician service use, breadth of procedures used, and costs.

Design, setting, and participants

This cohort study used Medicare Part B data from 2016 through 2017 in a fixed-effects panel data design to compare service use, procedure breadth, and costs between clinicians with multiple affiliations (treatment group) and clinicians with a single affiliation (control group), with adjustment for volume, patients, and clinician characteristics. The study also controlled for unobserved (time-invariant) clinician characteristics using individual clinician fixed effects. Clinicians with Medicare claims, a reported National Provider Identifier, and affiliation data within Medicare Physician Compare were included for a total sample of 1 073 252 observations (633 552 unique clinicians) for medical services and 358 669 observations (210 260 unique clinicians) for drug prescribing. Statistical analyses were performed from February 1 to October 15, 2021.

Main outcomes and measures

Service use is the total number of medical (or drug) services that clinicians render to their Medicare beneficiaries within a given year, procedure breadth is the total number of unique Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System codes that are associated with clinicians' medical (or drug) services within a given year, and costs represent the total standardized amount paid by Medicare for the medical (or drug) services. Additional measures were multiple-hospital affiliations, Accountable Care Organization affiliation, and controls across clinician and patient characteristics.

Results

The medical service sample consisted of 633 552 clinicians (248 359 women [39.2%]; mean [SD] of 19.6 [12.5] years of experience), and the drug service sample consisted of 210 260 clinicians (74 875 women [35.6%]; mean [SD] of 21.6 [12.3] years of experience). For medical services, clinicians with multiple practice affiliations used a mean 8.2% (95% CI, 7.5%-8.9%; P < .001) more medical services per patient, drew on a mean 5.4% (95% CI, 5.1%-5.7%; P < .001) wider set of procedures within their medical care, and incurred a mean 8.6% (95% CI, 7.9%-9.2%; P < .001) more in medical costs. Pertaining to drug services, clinicians with multiple practice affiliations used a mean 2.9% (95% CI, 1.9%-3.9%; P < .001) more drug services per patient, drew on a mean 1.0% (95% CI, 0.5%-1.4%; P < .001) wider set of procedures within their medical care, and incurred a mean 2.7% (95% CI, 1.6%-3.7%; P < .001) more in drug costs. Significant results were also found across extensive and intensive margins of hospital affiliation, and supplemental analysis further indicated heterogenous treatment associations across clinician specialties.

Conclusions and relevance

This cohort study found that a clinician having multihospital affiliations was associated with greater service use, procedure breadth, and costs across both medical and drug services. These findings suggest that clinician affiliations ought to be considered as part of health care delivery design and potential cost-containment strategies.

SUBMITTER: Linde S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8678686 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceHigh-volume hospital care for laryngectomy has been shown to be associated with reduced morbidity, mortality, and costs; however, most hospitals in the United States do not perform high volumes of laryngectomies. The influence of market competition on charges and costs for such patients has not been defined.ObjectiveTo examine the association between regional hospital market concentration, hospital charges, and costs for laryngectomy.Design, setting, and participantsThe Nationwide Inpatient Sample was used to identify 34 193 patients who underwent laryngectomy for a malignant laryngeal or hypopharyngeal neoplasm from January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2011. Hospital laryngectomy volume was modeled as a categorical variable. Hospital market concentration was evaluated using a variable-radius Herfindahl-Hirschman Index from the 2003, 2006, and 2009 Hospital Market Structure Files. Statistical analysis was performed from May 19 to August 15, 2018.Main outcomes and measuresMultivariable generalized linear regression was used to evaluate associations between market concentration and total charges and costs for laryngectomy.ResultsAmong the 34 193 patients (19.3% female and 80.7% male; mean age, 62.7 years [range, 20.0-96.0 years]), 69.2% of procedures were performed at hospitals in highly concentrated (noncompetitive) markets and 26.2% were performed at hospitals in unconcentrated (highly competitive) markets. Most high-volume hospitals (68.0%) were located in highly concentrated markets, followed by unconcentrated markets (32.0%). Market share and volume were not associated with significant differences in total charges. Unconcentrated markets were associated with 28% higher costs (95% CI, 8%-53%) relative to moderately concentrated and highly concentrated markets. High-volume hospitals were associated with 22% lower costs (95% CI, -36% to -5%).Conclusions and relevanceCompetition among hospitals is associated with increased costs of care for laryngectomy. High-volume hospital care is associated with lower costs of care. These data suggest that hospital market consolidation of laryngectomy at centers able to meet minimum volume thresholds may improve health care value.

Project description:Importance:The persistent shortage of dermatologists in the United States affects access to care and patient outcomes. Objective:To characterize the effect of geographic variations in dermatologist density on the provision of dermatology procedures within Medicare. Design, Setting, and Participants:This was a cross-sectional study using the 2013 Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Database. Dermatology-related procedures were defined by the top 50 billing codes accounting for more than 95% of procedures billed by dermatologists. Billing codes corresponding to evaluation and monitoring visits and dermatopathology were excluded. Total costs were estimated from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services physician fee schedule, based on the nonfacility national payment amount with no modifiers. Nationally representative administrative database that includes 100% of charges billed by noninstitutional clinicians covered under Medicare Part B. A total of 10?391 dermatologists practicing within the 50 states and Washington, DC, were included. The Medicare-eligible population was defined as all persons 65 years or older. Exposures:Density of dermatologists, categorized into first (5.3 per 100?000 persons ?65 years) through fifth (54.8 per 100?000 persons ?65 years) quintiles. Main Outcomes and Measures:Utilization of dermatology procedures (mean volume per 100?000 persons ?65 years) and total cost (mean amount billed per person ?65 years) by clinician type across quintiles of dermatologist density. Results:In 2013, dermatologists billed Medicare for 28 million procedures costing $2.21 billion. Mean billed amount by dermatologists per person 65 years or older was $15.87 in the lowest-density quintile vs $92.02 in the highest-density quintile. This trend suggests that each interval increase of 10 dermatologists per 100?000 persons 65 years or older is correlated with a $14.81 increase in Medicare spending on dermatology procedures (95% CI, 8.28-21.34; P?=?.005). Utilization of these procedures differed among clinician types, with dermatologists largely performing destruction of premalignant lesions and PCPs primarily doing injections. Conclusions and Relevance:There is evidence of supply-sensitive variation in the provision of dermatology procedures for the Medicare-eligible population; higher dermatologist density is correlated with increased utilization of dermatology procedures and subsequent billed charges to Medicare. Further research is needed to determine the effect of such variations on outcomes and whether incentives can better align dermatologists with areas of clinical need.