From the Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.
Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center.
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2024 Jan 1;153(1):245-255. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000010591. Epub 2023 Apr 25.
Surgical treatment of lymphedema has outpaced coding paradigms. In the setting of ambiguity regarding coding for physiologic procedures [lymphovenous bypass (LVB) and vascularized lymph node transplant (VLNT)], we hypothesized that there would be variation in commercial reimbursement based on coding pattern.
The authors performed a cross-sectional analysis of 2021 nationwide hospital pricing data for 21 CPT codes encompassing excisional (direct excision, liposuction), physiologic (LVB, VLNT), and ancillary (lymphangiography) procedures. Within-hospital ratios (WHRs) and across-hospital ratios (AHRs) for adjusted commercial rates per CPT code quantified price variation. Mixed effects linear regression modeled associations of commercial rate with public payer (Medicare and Medicaid), self-pay, and chargemaster rates.
A total of 270,254 commercial rates, including 95,774 rates for physiologic procedures, were extracted from 2863 hospitals. Lymphangiography codes varied most in commercial price (WHR, 1.76 to 3.89; AHR, 8.12 to 44.38). For physiologic codes, WHRs ranged from 1.01 (VLNT; free omental flap) to 3.03 (LVB; unlisted lymphatic procedure), and AHRs ranged from 5.23 (LVB; lymphatic channel incision) to 10.36 (LVB; unlisted lymphatic procedure). Median adjusted commercial rates for excisional procedures ($3635.84) were higher than for physiologic procedures ($2560.40; P < 0.001). Commercial rate positively correlated with Medicare rate for all physiologic codes combined, although regression coefficients varied by code.
Commercial payer-negotiated rates for physiologic procedures were highly variable both within and across hospitals, reflective of variation in CPT codes. Physiologic procedures may be undervalued relative to excisional procedures. Consistent coding nomenclature should be developed for physiologic and ancillary procedures.
淋巴水肿的手术治疗已经超越了编码模式。在生理程序(淋巴静脉旁路 (LVB) 和血管化淋巴结移植 (VLNT))的编码存在歧义的情况下,我们假设基于编码模式,商业报销会有所不同。
作者对 2021 年全国医院定价数据进行了横断面分析,涵盖了 21 个 CPT 代码,包括切除术(直接切除、吸脂术)、生理(LVB、VLNT)和辅助(淋巴管造影)程序。每个 CPT 代码的调整后商业费率的院内比(WHR)和院间比(AHR)量化了价格变化。混合效应线性回归模型分析了商业费率与公共支付者(医疗保险和医疗补助)、自付和计费主数据的关联。
从 2863 家医院中提取了 270254 个商业费率,其中包括 95774 个生理程序费率。淋巴管造影术代码的商业价格差异最大(WHR,1.76 至 3.89;AHR,8.12 至 44.38)。对于生理代码,WHR 范围从 1.01(VLNT;游离网膜瓣)到 3.03(LVB;未列出的淋巴程序),AHR 范围从 5.23(LVB;淋巴通道切开术)到 10.36(LVB;未列出的淋巴程序)。切除术程序(3635.84 美元)的调整后商业费率中位数高于生理程序(2560.40 美元;P < 0.001)。所有生理代码的商业费率与医疗保险费率呈正相关,尽管回归系数因代码而异。
生理程序的商业支付方协商费率在医院内和医院间差异很大,反映了 CPT 代码的差异。与切除术相比,生理程序可能被低估。应制定用于生理和辅助程序的统一编码命名法。