Normal view MARC view ISBD view

Surprise Out-of-Network Bills for Hand and Upper Extremity Trauma Patients.

MedStar author(s):

Citation: Journal of Hand Surgery - American Volume. 2021 Nov 08PMID: 34763971Institution: Curtis National Hand CenterForm of publication: Journal ArticleMedline article type(s): Journal ArticleSubject headings: IN PROCESS -- NOT YET INDEXEDYear: 2021 Local holdings: Available in print through MWHC library: 1999 - 2002, Available online from MWHC library: 1995 - presentISSN:

0363-5023

Name of journal: The Journal of hand surgeryAbstract: CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Many hand and upper extremity patients requiring ED care receive surprise bills from various sources that result in higher out-of-pocket costs. Copyright (c) 2021 American Society for Surgery of the Hand. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.CONCLUSIONS: Although the incidence of surprise billing decreased, more than 10% of patients treated in an ED for hand trauma remain at risk. Coinsurance for surprise billing encounters increased by twice as much as encounters without surprise billing. Patients requiring services from therapists, radiologists, pathologists, and hand surgeons were at greater risk for surprise bills. The federal No Surprises Act, passed in 2020, targets surprise billing and may help address some of these issues.METHODS: We used IBM MarketScan data to evaluate hand and upper extremity trauma patients who received care in the ED from 2010 to 2017. Our primary outcome was the surprise billing incidence, defined as encounters in in-network EDs with out-of-network claims. We used descriptive and bivariate analyses to characterize surprise billing and used multivariable logistic regression to evaluate independent factors associated with surprise billing.PURPOSE: Patients may receive surprise out-of-network bills even when they present to in-network facilities. Surprise bills are common following emergency care. We sought to characterize and determine risk factors for surprise billing in hand and upper extremity trauma patients in the emergency department (ED).RESULTS: Of 710,974 ED encounters, 97,667 (14%) involved surprise billing. The incidence decreased from 26% in 2010 to 11% in 2017. Mean coinsurance payments were higher for surprise billing encounters and had double the growth from 2010 to 2017 compared to those without surprise billing. Receiving care from different provider types-especially therapists, radiologists, and pathologists, as well as hand surgeons-was associated with significantly higher odds of surprise billing. Transfer to another facility was not significantly associated with surprise billing.All authors: Giladi AM, Long C, Means KR Jr, Qiu C, Sanghavi KK, Zhang GFiscal year: FY2022 Digital Object Identifier:

https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2021.09.015

Date added to catalog: 2022-01-25

Holdings ( 1 )
Title notes ( 7 )

Holdings
Item type	Current library	Collection	Call number	Status	Date due	Barcode
Journal Article	MedStar Authors Catalog	Article	34763971	Available		34763971

Available in print through MWHC library: 1999 - 2002, Available online from MWHC library: 1995 - present

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Many hand and upper extremity patients requiring ED care receive surprise bills from various sources that result in higher out-of-pocket costs. Copyright (c) 2021 American Society for Surgery of the Hand. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

CONCLUSIONS: Although the incidence of surprise billing decreased, more than 10% of patients treated in an ED for hand trauma remain at risk. Coinsurance for surprise billing encounters increased by twice as much as encounters without surprise billing. Patients requiring services from therapists, radiologists, pathologists, and hand surgeons were at greater risk for surprise bills. The federal No Surprises Act, passed in 2020, targets surprise billing and may help address some of these issues.

METHODS: We used IBM MarketScan data to evaluate hand and upper extremity trauma patients who received care in the ED from 2010 to 2017. Our primary outcome was the surprise billing incidence, defined as encounters in in-network EDs with out-of-network claims. We used descriptive and bivariate analyses to characterize surprise billing and used multivariable logistic regression to evaluate independent factors associated with surprise billing.

PURPOSE: Patients may receive surprise out-of-network bills even when they present to in-network facilities. Surprise bills are common following emergency care. We sought to characterize and determine risk factors for surprise billing in hand and upper extremity trauma patients in the emergency department (ED).

RESULTS: Of 710,974 ED encounters, 97,667 (14%) involved surprise billing. The incidence decreased from 26% in 2010 to 11% in 2017. Mean coinsurance payments were higher for surprise billing encounters and had double the growth from 2010 to 2017 compared to those without surprise billing. Receiving care from different provider types-especially therapists, radiologists, and pathologists, as well as hand surgeons-was associated with significantly higher odds of surprise billing. Transfer to another facility was not significantly associated with surprise billing.

English