Quality Improvement Interventions to Enhance Physician Billing: A Systematic Review.

Rebecca Theal, Annabel Chan, Akshay Rajaram
{"title":"Quality Improvement Interventions to Enhance Physician Billing: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Rebecca Theal, Annabel Chan, Akshay Rajaram","doi":"10.1097/JMQ.0000000000000243","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Physicians encounter several challenges with current billing processes. The current Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-guided systematic review identifies and characterizes quality improvement (QI) strategies to enhance physician billing. MEDLINE, EMBASE, HealthStar, and Web of Science were searched for studies that described QI interventions targeting practicing or trainee physicians and outcomes including improved efficacy, enhanced efficiency, accurate billing code selection, or increased satisfaction. Fifty-six of 11,621 studies met the inclusion criteria. More than 40% of studies utilized more than 1 intervention and over 60% of studies included an educational intervention. Revenue-related outcomes were commonly reported among included studies (n = 30, 54%), followed by accuracy or error rates (n = 22, 43%), and billing completion rates (n = 14, 25%). QI interventions to enhance physician billing tend to be lower on the hierarchy of intervention effectiveness. Future work should explore the durability and generalizability of interventions and their impact on physician and patient outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":101338,"journal":{"name":"American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical Quality","volume":" ","pages":"177-198"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical Quality","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JMQ.0000000000000243","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Physicians encounter several challenges with current billing processes. The current Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-guided systematic review identifies and characterizes quality improvement (QI) strategies to enhance physician billing. MEDLINE, EMBASE, HealthStar, and Web of Science were searched for studies that described QI interventions targeting practicing or trainee physicians and outcomes including improved efficacy, enhanced efficiency, accurate billing code selection, or increased satisfaction. Fifty-six of 11,621 studies met the inclusion criteria. More than 40% of studies utilized more than 1 intervention and over 60% of studies included an educational intervention. Revenue-related outcomes were commonly reported among included studies (n = 30, 54%), followed by accuracy or error rates (n = 22, 43%), and billing completion rates (n = 14, 25%). QI interventions to enhance physician billing tend to be lower on the hierarchy of intervention effectiveness. Future work should explore the durability and generalizability of interventions and their impact on physician and patient outcomes.

质量改进干预措施提高医生计费:系统评价。
医生在当前的计费流程中遇到了一些挑战。当前系统评价和meta分析指导的系统评价的首选报告项目确定并描述了质量改进(QI)策略,以提高医生计费。我们检索了MEDLINE、EMBASE、HealthStar和Web of Science,以寻找描述针对执业或实习医生的QI干预措施的研究,以及包括改善疗效、提高效率、准确计费代码选择或提高满意度在内的结果。11,621项研究中有56项符合纳入标准。超过40%的研究使用了一种以上的干预措施,超过60%的研究包括了教育干预措施。在纳入的研究中,通常报告了与收入相关的结果(n = 30, 54%),其次是准确性或错误率(n = 22, 43%)和计费完成率(n = 14, 25%)。提高医生计费的QI干预往往在干预效果的层次上较低。未来的工作应该探索干预措施的持久性和普遍性及其对医生和患者结果的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信