Search

BACKGROUND Financial key performance indicators are often used to evaluate performance. Understanding of key performance indicators can be crucial for career advancement and bargaining leverage in resource negotiations. This study aimed to identify the most important key performance indicators used in surgical funding requests and understand how to use these metrics in clinical practice. METHODS In two tertiary medical centers, funding requests for surgeon gap support (2019 to 2020) and equipment (2017 to 2019) within departments of surgery were reviewed. The requesting department, approval status, and amount allotted were recorded. In requests for gap support, projections for contribution margin, operating room volume, charges, collections, and relative value units were tracked. Projected contribution margin and cost savings were recorded for equipment funding requests. RESULTS There were 40 gap support and 24 equipment requests, and all were approved. Most gap support requests included collections (90.0 percent), charges (87.5 percent), operating room cases (80.0 percent), relative value units (77.5 percent), and hospital contribution margin (77.5 percent). The most represented departments were general surgery (37.5 percent), neurosurgery (22.5 percent), and plastic surgery (15.0 percent). The departments that submitted the most equipment requests were general surgery (28.0 percent) and neurosurgery (28.0 percent). Most requests included projections for contribution margin (95.8 percent) and cost savings (87.4 percent). Projected hospital contribution margin correlated with the amount of funds allotted for surgeon support (r = 0.409; p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS This multicenter study identified the importance of using key performance indicators for a successful financial outcome in funding requests. In addition, the authors demonstrate the need for surgeons to understand their own key performance indicators. Surgeons should advocate for increased transparency to better understand their financial contributions and performance.

Background Aesthetic surgery is a critical component of academic plastic surgery. As institutions are placing increased focus on aesthetic surgery, there is an opportunity to identify factors that facilitate the creation and maintenance of successful aesthetic plastic surgery programs. Objectives The aim of this study was to conduct a national survey to evaluate the current state of academic aesthetic surgery and to identify factors that contribute to success. Methods A REDCap 122-question survey was developed and validated by members of the Academic Aesthetic Surgery Roundtable (AASR). The national survey was distributed to department chairs and division chiefs with active ACGME-approved plastic surgery programs (n = 92). Responses underwent Pearson’s chi-squared, Wilcoxon rank-sum, and postselection inference analyses. AASR members convened to interpret data and identify best practices. Results Responses were received from 64 of 92 queries (69.6%). The multivariate analysis concluded traits associated with successful academic aesthetic surgery practices included the presence of aesthetic surgery–focused, full-time faculty whose overall practice includes >50% aesthetic surgery (P = 0.040) and nonphysician aesthetic practitioners who provide injection services (P = 0.025). In the univariate analysis, factors associated with strong aesthetic surgery training programs included resident participation in faculty aesthetic clinics (P = 0.034), aesthetic research (P = 0.006), and discounted resident aesthetic clinics (P < 0.001). Conclusions The growth of academic aesthetic surgery practices represents a significant opportunity for advancement of resident training, departmental financial success, and diversification of faculty practices. By identifying and sharing best practices and strategies, academic aesthetic surgery practices can be further enhanced.