Leveraging Advanced Practice Providers in an Otolaryngology Practice

2020 ◽  
pp. 019459982097292
Author(s):  
Nita Sharma ◽  
David Upjohn ◽  
Carrlene Donald ◽  
Katie E. Zoske ◽  
Chelsea L. Aldridge ◽  
...  

Objective Advanced practice providers (APPs) may see patients independently or assist in “collaborative” clinics in otolaryngology practices. Our goal was to redesign the collaborative physician-APP clinic model to increase patient access, maintain financial sustainability, and optimize patient and staff experience. Methods The study was performed in a tertiary care academic rhinology clinic seeing adult patients. The DMAIC framework (define, measure, analyze, improve, control) was used to develop the new model. The process shift between old and new models was analyzed by utilizing a statistical process control chart. Patient and staff surveys were tracked. Results The collaborative physician-APP model was redesigned into 2 parallel and independently run (“concurrent”) physician and APP clinics. Patient access increased by 38.9% from a mean of 17.9 patients per collaborative clinic (n = 15 days, 269 patients) to 29.3 patients per concurrent clinic (n = 12 days, 352 patients). Medicare reimbursement rate modeling showed the collaborative clinic to operate at a loss of $1341.51 per day, while the concurrent clinic model operated at a $1309.88 gain (200% positive change). Patient and staff experience tracked positively. Discussion Otolaryngology clinics can become overwhelmed by the volume of empaneled established patients. Traditional collaborative physician-APP clinics see the same panel of patients together. However, these can be successfully redesigned to a concurrent model. Concurrent clinics improve patient access and provider satisfaction while maintaining patient satisfaction and fiscal performance. Implications for Practice Leveraging an experienced APP to run a parallel and independent clinic alongside the physician (concurrent clinic model) may improve patient access, financial metrics, and patient/staff experience.

PRILOZI ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Grozdanova ◽  
Katerina Ancevska Netkovska ◽  
Zoran Sterjev ◽  
Zorica Naumovska ◽  
Rubin Zarevski ◽  
...  

Abstract The use of biological medicine has significantly increased in recent decades and has made substantial contributions to improving the effectiveness of therapies in many diseases. The expiration of patents of biological innovative medicines enables copies of those drugs called similar biological products (biosimilars) to be approved by regulatory authorities and to enter in clinical use. Biosimilars are comparable but not identical and are not a generic version of the innovator biological product. Although biosimilars undergo rigorous characterization as well as clinical studies to prove their safety and effectiveness, specific regulatory requirements for registration apply in the case of biosimilars. They are highly complex molecules and small changes in the production process can have major implications in its safety and effectiveness profile. The availability of biosimilars enhances competition, with the potential to improve patient access to biological medicines and to contribute to the financial sustainability of healthcare systems. In order to be certain that a biosimilar reaches its potential in clinical use, an intensive pharmacovigilance monitoring system must be established in order to prove the true similarity between the original biologic and its biosimilar. There is a need for further guidance and resolution of the ongoing discussions on biosimilar labelling, naming, pharmacovigilance and substitution in order to ensure effective and appropriate use of biosimilars in clinical practice.


2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 151-154
Author(s):  
Melody Chen ◽  
Jonathan Kiechle ◽  
Zachary Maher ◽  
Christopher Gonzalez

2018 ◽  
Vol 199 (4S) ◽  
Author(s):  
Melody Chen ◽  
Jonathan Kiechle ◽  
Zachary Maher ◽  
Christopher Gonzalez

Hand ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 155894472199080
Author(s):  
Danielle A Thornburg ◽  
Nikita Gupta ◽  
Nathan Chow ◽  
Jack Haglin ◽  
Shelley Noland

Background: Medicare reimbursement trends across multiple surgical subspecialties have been analyzed; however, little has been reported regarding the long-term trends in reimbursement of hand surgery procedures. The aim of this study is to analyze trends in Medicare reimbursement for commonly performed hand surgeries. Methods: Using the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File, we determined the 20 hand surgery procedure codes most commonly billed to Medicare in 2016. Reimbursement rates were collected and analyzed for each code from The Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool for years 2000 to 2019. We compared the change in reimbursement rate for each procedure to the rate of inflation in US dollars, using the Consumer Price Index (CPI) over the same time period. Results: The reimbursement rate for each procedure increased on average by 13.9% during the study period while the United States CPI increased significantly more by 46.7% ( P < .0001). When all reimbursement data were adjusted for inflation to 2019 dollars, the average reimbursement for all included procedures in this study decreased by 22.6% from 2000 to 2019. The average adjusted reimbursement rate for all procedures decreased by 21.92% from 2000 to 2009 and decreased by 0.86% on average from 2009 to 2019 ( P < .0001). Conclusion: When adjusted for inflation, Medicare reimbursement for hand surgery has steadily decreased over the past 20 years. It will be important to consider the implications of these trends when evaluating healthcare policies and the impact this has on access to hand surgery.


Pharmaceutics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 48
Author(s):  
Ioana Gherghescu ◽  
M. Begoña Delgado-Charro

Biosimilar medicines expand the biotherapeutic market and improve patient access. This work looked into the landscape of the European and US biosimilar products, their regulatory authorization, market availability, and clinical evaluation undergone prior to the regulatory approval. European Medicines Agency (EMEA, currently EMA) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) repositories were searched to identify all biosimilar medicines approved before December 2019. Adalimumab biosimilars, and particularly their clinical evaluations, were used as a case study. In the past 13 years, the EMA has received 65 marketing authorization applications for biosimilar medicines with 55 approved biosimilars available in the EU market. Since the first biosimilar approval in 2015, the FDA has granted 26 approvals for biosimilars with only 11 being currently on the US market. Five adalimumab biosimilars have been approved in the EU and commercialized as eight different medicines through duplicate marketing authorizations. Whilst three of these are FDA-approved, the first adalimumab biosimilar will not be marketed in the US until 2023 due to Humira’s exclusivity period. The EU biosimilar market has developed faster than its US counterpart, as the latter is probably challenged by a series of patents and exclusivity periods protecting the bio-originator medicines, an issue addressed by the US’s latest ‘Biosimilar Action Plan’.


2020 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. S610
Author(s):  
L.H. Cheung ◽  
A. Chaupin ◽  
S. Duttagupta

2013 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 461-467 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristin S. Vickers ◽  
Jennifer L. Ridgeway ◽  
Julie C. Hathaway ◽  
Jason S. Egginton ◽  
Angela B. Kaderlik ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Melissa E. Cyr ◽  
Daryl Boucher ◽  
Ashley A. Holmes ◽  
James C. Benneyan

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document