Variation in Prices Charged to Patients for Specialty Intraocular Lenses Inserted during Universally Covered Cataract Surgery

Patients often pay for specialty intraocular lenses (IOLs) for cataract surgery covered by universal insurance. This practice creates the potential for inequitable pricing where the medical service provider is also the retailer. We measured the variation in prices between cataract surgeons for the same IOL and associated testing.We telephoned every cataract surgeon in Ontario, Canada, and asked their price for the most common type of specialty IOL as a prospective patient. We measured the total prices quoted and variation between providers.We contacted 404 ophthalmologists. There were 256 that performed cataract surgery but 127 offered the most commonly employed specialty IOL and would provide a price to patients over the telephone. We obtained prices from all 127 ophthalmologists. Prices for the same lens and associated testing varied substantially between ophthalmologists from $358 to$2790 (median $615, interquartile range$528-$915). There was variation in all components of the total out-of-pocket price, including the price for the IOL itself, charges for uninsured eye measurements, and non-specific supplemental fees.Although cataract surgery is covered by public health insurance, some ophthalmologists charge much more than others for the same specialty IOL and associated testing. Greater access to price information and better regulatory control could help ensure patients receive fair value for out-of-pocket health expenses

Volume-based referral for cardiovascular procedures in the United States: a cross-sectional regression analysis

BACKGROUND: We sought to estimate the numbers of patients affected and deaths avoided by adopting the Leapfrog Group's recommended hospital procedure volume minimums for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In addition to hospital risk-adjusted mortality standards, the Leapfrog Group recommends annual hospital procedure minimums of 450 for CABG and 400 for PCI to reduce procedure-associated mortality. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of a national hospital discharge database to evaluate in-hospital mortality among patients who underwent PCI (n = 2,500,796) or CABG (n = 1,496,937) between 1998 and 2001. We calculated the number of patients treated at low volume hospitals and simulated the number of deaths potentially averted by moving all patients to high volume hospitals under best-case conditions (i.e., assuming the full volume-associated reduction in mortality and the capacity to move all patients to high volume hospitals with no related harms). RESULTS: Multivariate adjusted odds of in-hospital mortality were higher for patients treated in low volume hospitals compared with high volume hospitals for CABG (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.10–1.24) and PCI (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.05–1.20). A policy of hospital volume minimums would have required moving 143,687 patients for CABG and 87,661 patients for PCI from low volume to high volume hospitals annually and prevented an estimated 619 CABG deaths and 109 PCI deaths. Thus, preventing a single death would have required moving 232 CABG patients or 805 PCI patients from low volume to high volume hospitals. CONCLUSION: Recommended hospital CABG and PCI volume minimums would prevent 728 deaths annually in the United States, fewer than previously estimated. It is unclear whether a policy requiring the movement of large numbers of patients to avoid relatively few deaths is feasible or effective

Evaluating compulsory minimum volume standards in Germany: how many hospitals were compliant in 2004?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Minimum hospital procedure volumes are discussed as an instrument for quality assurance. In 2004 Germany introduced such annual minimum volumes nationwide on five surgical procedures: kidney, liver, stem cell transplantation, complex oesophageal, and pancreatic interventions. The present investigation is the first part of a study evaluating the effects of these minimum volumes on health care provision. Research questions address how many hospitals and cases were affected by minimum volume regulations in 2004, how affected hospitals were distributed according to minimum volumes, and how many hospitals within the 16 German states complied with the standards set for 2004.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The evaluation is based on the mandatory hospital quality reports for 2004. In the reports, all hospitals are statutorily obliged to state the number of procedures performed for each minimum volume. The data were analyzed descriptively.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In 2004, 485 out of 1710 German hospitals providing acute care and approximately 0.14% of all hospital cases were affected by minimum volume regulations. Liver, kidney, and stem cell transplantation affected from 23 to hospitals; complex oesophageal and pancreatic interventions affected from 297 to 455 hospitals. The inter-state comparison of the average hospital care area demonstrates large differences between city states and large area states and the eastern and western German states ranging from a minimum 51 km²up to a maximum 23.200 km², varying according to each procedure. A range of 9% – 16% of the transplantation hospitals did not comply with the standards affecting 1% – 2% of the patients whereas 29% and 18% of the hospitals treating complex oesophageal and pancreatic interventions failed the standards affecting 2% – 5% of the prevailing cases.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In 2004, the newly introduced minimum volume regulations affected only up to a quarter of German acute care hospitals and few cases. However, excluding the hospitals not meeting the minimum volume standards from providing the respective procedures deserves considering two aspects: the hospital health care provision concepts by the German states as being responsible and from a patient perspective the geographically equal access to hospital care.</p