Search

Objective Accurate documentation of patient care and acuity is essential to determine appropriate reimbursement as well as accuracy of key publicly reported quality metrics. We sought to investigate the impact of standardized note templates by inpatient advanced practice providers (APPs) on evaluation and management (E/M) charge capture, including outside of the global surgical package (GSP), and quality metrics including case mix index (CMI) and mortality index (MI). We hypothesized this clinical documentation initiative as well as improved coding of E/M services would result in increased reimbursement and quality metrics. Methods A documentation and coding initiative on the heart and vascular service line was initiated in 2016 with focus on improving inpatient E/M capture by APPs outside the GSP. Comprehensive training sessions and standardized documentation templates were created and implemented in the electronic medical record. Subsequent hospital care E/M (current procedural terminology codes 99231, 99232, 99233) from the years 2015 to 2017 were audited and analyzed for charge capture rates, collections, work relative value units (wRVUs), and billing complexity. Data were compared over time by standardizing CMS values and reimbursement rates. In addition, overall CMI and MI were calculated each year. Results One year following the documentation initiative, E/M charges on the vascular surgery service line increased by 78.5% with a corresponding increase in APP charges from 0.4% of billable E/M services to 70.4% when compared with pre-initiative data. The charge capture of E/M services among all inpatients rose from 21.4% to 37.9%. Additionally, reimbursement from CMS increased by 65% as total work relative value units generated from E/M services rose by 78.4% (797 to 1422). The MI decreased over the study period by 25.4%. Additionally, there was a corresponding 5.6% increase in the cohort CMI. Distribution of E/M encounter charges did not vary significantly. Meanwhile, the prevalence of 14 clinical comorbidities in our cohort as well as length of stay (P = .88) remained non-statistically different throughout the study period. Conclusions Accurate clinical documentation of E/M care and ultimately inpatient acuity is critical in determining quality metrics that serve as important measures of overall hospital quality for CMS value-based payments and rankings. A system-based documentation initiative and expanded role of inpatient APPs on vascular surgery teams significantly improved charge capture and reimbursement outside the GSP as well as CMI and MI in a consistently complex patient population.

Vascular surgery integrated residency (VSIR) programs are highly competitive; however, criteria for resident selection remain opaque and non-standardized. The already unclear selection criteria will be further impacted by the impending transition of the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 from numeric scores to a binary pass/fail outcome. The purpose of this study was to investigate the historical and anticipated selection criteria of VSIR applicants.This was a cross-sectional, nationwide, 59-item survey that was sent to all VSIR program directors (PDs). Data was analyzed using the Fisher exact test if categorical and the Mann-Whitney U test and the Kruskal-Wallis test if ordinal.Forty of 69 PDs (58%) responded to the survey. University-based programs constituted 85% of responders. Most VSIR PDs (65%) reported reviewing between 101 to 150 applications for 1 to 2 positions annually. Forty-two percent of the responding PDs reported sole responsibility for inviting applicants to interview, whereas 50% had a team of faculty responsible for reviewing applications. On a five-point Likert scale, letters of recommendation (LOR) from vascular surgeons or colleagues (a person the PD knows) were the most important objective criteria. Work within a team structure was rated highest among subjective criteria. The majority of respondents (72%) currently use the Step 1 score as a primary method to screen applicants. Regional differences in use of Step 1 score as a primary screening method were: Midwest (100%), Northeast (76%), South (43%), and West (40%) (P = .01). PDs responded that that they will use USMLE Step 2 score (42%) and LOR (10%) to replace USMLE Step 1 score. The current top ranked selection criteria are letters from a vascular surgeon, USMLE Step 1 score and overall LOR. The proposed top ranked selection criteria after transition of USMLE Step 1 to pass/fail include LOR overall followed by Step 2 score.This is the first study to evaluate the selection criteria used by PDs for VSIR. The landscape of VSIR selection criteria is shifting and increasing transparency is essential to applicants' understanding of the selection process. The transition of USMLE Step 1 to a pass/fail report will shift the attention to Step 2 scores and elevate the importance of other relatively more subjective criteria. Defining VSIR program selection criteria is an important first step toward establishing holistic review processes that are transparent and equitable.