Suppr超能文献

比较预估《无意外法案》合格支付金额与向网络内和网络外急诊医学专业人员的支付

Comparison of Estimated No Surprises Act Qualifying Payment Amounts and Payments to In-Network and Out-of-Network Emergency Medicine Professionals.

机构信息

University of Southern California Leonard D. Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics, Los Angeles.

Economics Department, Lafayette College, Easton, Pennsylvania.

出版信息

JAMA Health Forum. 2022 Sep 2;3(9):e223085. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2022.3085.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

The No Surprises Act (NSA), which took effect on January 1, 2022, applies a qualifying payment amount (QPA) as an out-of-network payment reference point. An understanding of how QPA measures compare with the in-network and out-of-network payments physicians received before the NSA implementation may be useful to policy makers and stakeholders.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the QPA for geographic and funding markets and compare QPA estimates with in-network and out-of-network payments for 2019 emergency medicine claims.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study of US commercial insurance claims assessed the Health Care Cost Institute's 2019 commercial professional emergency medicine claims (Current Procedural Terminology [CPT] codes 99281-99285 and 99291) and included enrollees in commercial health maintenance organizations, exclusive provider organizations, point of service, and preferred provider organizations self-funded and fully insured through Aetna, Humana, and some Blue Health Intelligence plans. Claims with missing or inconsistent data fields were excluded. Data were analyzed November 1, 2021, to April 7, 2022.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The QPA was calculated as the median allowed amount of all observed claims within strata defined by geographic region, CPT code, and funding market. For each stratum, the ratio of mean in-network allowed amounts to QPAs and mean out-of-network allowed amounts to QPAs were calculated. Then the volume-weighted mean of these ratios was computed across CPT codes within each geographic and funding market stratum.

RESULTS

The analytic sample included 7 556 541 professional emergency claims with a mean (SD) allowed amount of $313 ($306) and mean (SD) QPA of $252 ($133). Among the 650 geographic and market strata in the sample, the mean in-network allowed amounts were 14% (ratio, 0.96) higher than the estimated QPA. For the subset of strata with a sufficient sample of out-of-network claims (n = 227), the mean out-of-network payments were 112% (ratio, 2.12) higher than the QPA. More generous out-of-network payments were from self-funded plans (120% [ratio, 2.20] higher than the QPA estimate) vs fully insured plans (43% [ratio, 1.43] higher than the QPA estimate). Mean in-network allowed amounts for nonphysician clinicians were 4% (ratio, 1.04) lower than the QPA, whereas mean in-network allowed amounts for physicians were 15% (ratio, 1.15) higher than the QPA estimates. These differences remained after adjusting for geographic region.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this cross-sectional study of US commercial insurance claims suggest that the NSA may have heterogeneous implications for out-of-network payments and negotiating leverage experienced by emergency medicine physicians in different geographic markets, with the potential for greater implications in the self-funded market.

摘要

重要性:自 2022 年 1 月 1 日起生效的《平价医疗法案》(No Surprises Act,NSA)采用了合格支付金额(QPA)作为非网络支付的参考点。了解 QPA 衡量标准与 NSA 实施前医生获得的网络内和网络外支付之间的比较,可能对政策制定者和利益相关者有用。

目的:估计地理和资金市场的 QPA,并比较 2019 年急诊医学索赔的 QPA 估计值与网络内和网络外支付。

设计、设置和参与者:这项对美国商业保险索赔的横断面研究评估了医疗保健成本协会的 2019 年商业专业急诊医学索赔(当前程序术语 [CPT] 代码 99281-99285 和 99291),并包括商业健康维持组织、独家提供商组织、服务点和首选提供商组织的参保人,这些组织通过 Aetna、Humana 和一些 Blue Health Intelligence 计划自我投保和完全投保。排除了数据缺失或不一致的索赔。数据分析于 2021 年 11 月 1 日至 2022 年 4 月 7 日进行。

主要结果和措施:QPA 是根据地理位置、CPT 代码和资金市场定义的分层中所有观察到的索赔的中位数允许金额计算得出的。对于每个分层,计算了网络内允许金额与 QPA 的平均值与网络外允许金额与 QPA 的平均值的比值。然后,计算了这些比率在每个地理和资金市场分层内 CPT 代码中的体积加权平均值。

结果:分析样本包括 7556541 份专业急诊索赔,平均(SD)允许金额为 313 美元(306 美元),平均(SD)QPA 为 252 美元(133 美元)。在样本中的 650 个地理和市场分层中,网络内允许金额平均比估计的 QPA 高 14%(比值为 0.96)。对于具有足够网络外索赔样本的子分层(n=227),网络外支付的平均金额比 QPA 高 112%(比值为 2.12)。自付计划的网络外支付更慷慨(比 QPA 高出 120%[比值为 2.20]),而完全保险计划的网络外支付高出 43%(比值为 1.43)。非医师临床医生的网络内允许金额比 QPA 低 4%(比值为 1.04),而医师的网络内允许金额比 QPA 高出 15%(比值为 1.15)。这些差异在调整地理位置后仍然存在。

结论和相关性:这项对美国商业保险索赔的横断面研究的结果表明,NSA 可能对不同地理市场的急诊医学医生的网络外支付和谈判影响力产生不同的影响,在自付市场中可能产生更大的影响。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/74b7/9482054/e8c161b0d15e/jamahealthforum-e223085-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验