Kerber Kevin A, Raphaelson Marc, Barkley Gregory L, Burke James F
*Department of Neurology Health Services Research Program, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MI †Private practice, Leesburg, VA ‡Department of Neurology, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI.
Ann Surg. 2015 Aug;262(2):267-72. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000990.
To determine whether the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Physician Fee Schedule confers higher value for physician work in procedure and test codes than in Evaluation and Management (E/M) codes.
Medicare Payment Advisory Commission previously demonstrated that time for medical services is the dominant element in valuing physician work in the CMS Physician Fee Schedule. In contrast, a more recent analysis suggests that more relative value units (RVUs) per unit time are issued for work in procedure codes than in E/M codes. Both prior analyses had important limitations for evaluating a possible systematic differential valuation of medical services.
Data regarding RVUs, physician work times (minutes), and claims were obtained for all active level I Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes from 2011 CMS files. Linear regression was used to assess the associations of work time components and CPT category with work RVUs, including a model that weighted codes by the number of claims.
Included in the analysis were 6522 CPT codes (87 E/M codes, 6435 procedure/test codes). Compared with E/M codes, procedure/test codes did not have a significant difference in work RVUs adjusting for time (-0.631; 95% confidence interval, -1.427 to 0.166). The analysis also did not indicate a work RVU advantage specifically for Surgical CPT codes compared with E/M adjusting for time (-0.760; 95% confidence interval, -1.560 to 0.040). This pattern was not altered after weighting codes by the number of claims, indicating that an increase in RVUs per minute was not concentrated in a small number of highly utilized procedure codes.
We did not find evidence of a systematic higher valuation of physician work in procedure/test codes than in E/M codes in the CMS RVU system.
确定医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)的医师费率表在程序和检验编码中赋予医师工作的价值是否高于评估与管理(E/M)编码。
医疗保险支付咨询委员会先前表明,医疗服务时间是CMS医师费率表中评估医师工作价值的主导因素。相比之下,最近的一项分析表明,与E/M编码相比,程序编码中每单位时间发放的相对价值单位(RVU)更多。这两项先前的分析在评估医疗服务可能存在的系统性差异估值方面都有重要局限性。
从2011年CMS文件中获取了所有现行一级《当前操作术语》(CPT)编码的RVU、医师工作时间(分钟)和索赔数据。采用线性回归评估工作时间组成部分和CPT类别与工作RVU之间的关联,包括一个按索赔数量对编码进行加权的模型。
分析纳入了6522个CPT编码(87个E/M编码,6435个程序/检验编码)。与E/M编码相比,在根据时间调整后的工作RVU方面,程序/检验编码没有显著差异(-0.631;95%置信区间,-1.427至0.166)。该分析也未表明,与根据时间调整后的E/M编码相比,外科CPT编码在工作RVU方面具有优势(-0.760;95%置信区间,-1.560至0.040)。在按索赔数量对编码进行加权后,这种模式没有改变,这表明每分钟RVU的增加并非集中在少数高利用率的程序编码中。
我们没有发现证据表明在CMS的RVU系统中,程序/检验编码中医师工作的估值系统地高于E/M编码。