儿科额眶推进手术的计费实践:国家计费数据库的回顾。

IF 1 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Diego A Gomez, Anna D Lee, Elliot L H Le, Christodoulos Kaoutzanis, Skyler K Palmer, Jason W Yu, Brooke French, David W Mathes, Phuong D Nguyen, David Y Khechoyan
{"title":"儿科额眶推进手术的计费实践:国家计费数据库的回顾。","authors":"Diego A Gomez, Anna D Lee, Elliot L H Le, Christodoulos Kaoutzanis, Skyler K Palmer, Jason W Yu, Brooke French, David W Mathes, Phuong D Nguyen, David Y Khechoyan","doi":"10.1097/SCS.0000000000011368","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Fronto-orbital advancement (FOA) for craniosynostosis is the standard treatment for patients with anterior cranial vault differences. Despite its widespread use, national billing practices for FOA have not been described. This study analyzes billing codes from a national multicenter claims database to evaluate variations in billing for FOA, aiming to inform standardization efforts.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a retrospective study using PearlDiver, a national deidentified aggregate claims database covering over 100 million patients in the United States. Patients aged 0 to 16 years who had undergone FOA between 2007 and 2015 were included. CPT codes used to characterize various craniosynostosis and cranioplasty techniques, such as muscle flap, craniectomy for single or multiple suture craniosynostosis, bone flap, craniectomy, and other fronto-orbital contouring and bone graft interventions were included. Descriptive statistics were conducted using PearlDiver and Microsoft Excel.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 2026 patients met the inclusion criteria. In addition to billing for the index FOA procedure (CPT 21175), other codes billed in order of decreasing frequency were extensive craniectomy for multiple cranial suture craniosynostosis requiring multiple osteotomies and bone autografts (44.6%), craniectomy with bifrontal bone flap (37.1%), and muscle advancement flap to the orbital bandeau (7.3%). Less frequently billed codes included extensive craniectomy for multisuture craniosynostosis not requiring bone grafts (4.5%), and forehead reconstruction with autografts (3.95%) or allografts (1.28%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study characterizes current national trends in fronto-orbital advancement billing practices. Our findings emphasize the need for standardization to ensure equitable compensation that reflects the complexity of FOA procedures.</p>","PeriodicalId":15462,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Craniofacial Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Billing Practices in Pediatric Fronto-Orbital Advancement Surgeries: Review of a National Billing Database.\",\"authors\":\"Diego A Gomez, Anna D Lee, Elliot L H Le, Christodoulos Kaoutzanis, Skyler K Palmer, Jason W Yu, Brooke French, David W Mathes, Phuong D Nguyen, David Y Khechoyan\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/SCS.0000000000011368\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Fronto-orbital advancement (FOA) for craniosynostosis is the standard treatment for patients with anterior cranial vault differences. Despite its widespread use, national billing practices for FOA have not been described. This study analyzes billing codes from a national multicenter claims database to evaluate variations in billing for FOA, aiming to inform standardization efforts.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a retrospective study using PearlDiver, a national deidentified aggregate claims database covering over 100 million patients in the United States. Patients aged 0 to 16 years who had undergone FOA between 2007 and 2015 were included. CPT codes used to characterize various craniosynostosis and cranioplasty techniques, such as muscle flap, craniectomy for single or multiple suture craniosynostosis, bone flap, craniectomy, and other fronto-orbital contouring and bone graft interventions were included. Descriptive statistics were conducted using PearlDiver and Microsoft Excel.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 2026 patients met the inclusion criteria. In addition to billing for the index FOA procedure (CPT 21175), other codes billed in order of decreasing frequency were extensive craniectomy for multiple cranial suture craniosynostosis requiring multiple osteotomies and bone autografts (44.6%), craniectomy with bifrontal bone flap (37.1%), and muscle advancement flap to the orbital bandeau (7.3%). Less frequently billed codes included extensive craniectomy for multisuture craniosynostosis not requiring bone grafts (4.5%), and forehead reconstruction with autografts (3.95%) or allografts (1.28%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study characterizes current national trends in fronto-orbital advancement billing practices. Our findings emphasize the need for standardization to ensure equitable compensation that reflects the complexity of FOA procedures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15462,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Craniofacial Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Craniofacial Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000011368\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Craniofacial Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000011368","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:额眶进路(FOA)治疗颅缝闭锁是治疗前颅穹窿差异患者的标准方法。尽管FOA被广泛使用,但是国家的FOA计费实践并没有被描述。本研究分析了来自国家多中心索赔数据库的计费代码,以评估FOA计费的变化,旨在为标准化工作提供信息。方法:我们使用PearlDiver进行了一项回顾性研究,这是一个覆盖美国超过1亿患者的国家未识别汇总索赔数据库。纳入了2007年至2015年间接受FOA的0至16岁患者。包括用于描述各种颅缝闭合和颅骨成形术的CPT代码,如肌肉瓣,单缝合线或多缝合线颅缝闭合的颅骨切除术,骨瓣,颅骨切除术以及其他额眶轮廓和骨移植干预。使用PearlDiver和Microsoft Excel进行描述性统计。结果:共有2026例患者符合纳入标准。除了FOA指数手术(CPT 21175)的账单外,其他按频率降序排列的代码是多颅缝合的广泛颅骨切除术,颅缝闭锁需要多次截骨和自体骨移植(44.6%),双额骨瓣颅骨切除术(37.1%)和眶带肌推进瓣(7.3%)。较少被记录的手术包括不需要骨移植的多缝合线颅缝闭合的广泛颅骨切除术(4.5%)和自体骨移植(3.95%)或同种异体骨移植(1.28%)的前额重建。结论:我们的研究描述了当前国家在前轨道预付账单实践方面的趋势。我们的研究结果强调了标准化的必要性,以确保公平的补偿,以反映FOA程序的复杂性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Billing Practices in Pediatric Fronto-Orbital Advancement Surgeries: Review of a National Billing Database.

Background: Fronto-orbital advancement (FOA) for craniosynostosis is the standard treatment for patients with anterior cranial vault differences. Despite its widespread use, national billing practices for FOA have not been described. This study analyzes billing codes from a national multicenter claims database to evaluate variations in billing for FOA, aiming to inform standardization efforts.

Methods: We performed a retrospective study using PearlDiver, a national deidentified aggregate claims database covering over 100 million patients in the United States. Patients aged 0 to 16 years who had undergone FOA between 2007 and 2015 were included. CPT codes used to characterize various craniosynostosis and cranioplasty techniques, such as muscle flap, craniectomy for single or multiple suture craniosynostosis, bone flap, craniectomy, and other fronto-orbital contouring and bone graft interventions were included. Descriptive statistics were conducted using PearlDiver and Microsoft Excel.

Results: A total of 2026 patients met the inclusion criteria. In addition to billing for the index FOA procedure (CPT 21175), other codes billed in order of decreasing frequency were extensive craniectomy for multiple cranial suture craniosynostosis requiring multiple osteotomies and bone autografts (44.6%), craniectomy with bifrontal bone flap (37.1%), and muscle advancement flap to the orbital bandeau (7.3%). Less frequently billed codes included extensive craniectomy for multisuture craniosynostosis not requiring bone grafts (4.5%), and forehead reconstruction with autografts (3.95%) or allografts (1.28%).

Conclusions: Our study characterizes current national trends in fronto-orbital advancement billing practices. Our findings emphasize the need for standardization to ensure equitable compensation that reflects the complexity of FOA procedures.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
11.10%
发文量
968
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: ​The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery serves as a forum of communication for all those involved in craniofacial surgery, maxillofacial surgery and pediatric plastic surgery. Coverage ranges from practical aspects of craniofacial surgery to the basic science that underlies surgical practice. The journal publishes original articles, scientific reviews, editorials and invited commentary, abstracts and selected articles from international journals, and occasional international bibliographies in craniofacial surgery.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信