Related Experiment Videos

DRG, costs and reimbursement following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: an economic appraisal

L D George Angus1, Daniel R Cottam, Piotr J Gorecki

  • 1Nassau University Medical Center, Department of Surgery, East Meadow, NY, USA. langus@numc.edu

Obesity Surgery
|August 26, 2003
PubMed

Insights

Physician reimbursement for bariatric surgery is significantly lower for publicly insured patients compared to privately insured patients. This disparity creates financial disincentives for surgeons treating public patients, impacting healthcare equity.

Area of Science:

  • Bariatric Surgery Outcomes
  • Healthcare Economics
  • Surgical Reimbursement Models

Background:

  • Discrepancies exist in hospital and physician reimbursement when Diagnosis Related Group (DRG) codes are utilized.
  • Reimbursement structures differ significantly based on insurance type, specifically per diem Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) versus public insurance.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To analyze and compare hospital and surgeon reimbursement rates for Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP) procedures based on insurance status (public vs. private).
  • To evaluate the financial implications of DRG-based reimbursement for bariatric surgery in a single institution.

Main Methods:

  • Retrospective analysis of 133 patients (59 privately-insured, 74 publicly-insured) undergoing RYGBP.
  • Comparison of surgeon and hospital reimbursement, complications, length of stay, and blood loss between insurance groups using DRG 288.
  • Evaluation of reimbursement rates against inpatient hospital costs for open and laparoscopic RYGBP.

Main Results:

  • Physician reimbursement was substantially higher for privately-insured patients ($2356 ± $822) compared to publicly-insured patients ($931 ± $73) (P<0.001).
  • Hospital reimbursement also showed significant differences: private ($4435 ± $3106) versus public ($11773 ± $4462) (P<0.001).
  • Estimated costs for open RYGBP ($3179) were lower than laparoscopic RYGBP ($4180), while the HMO per diem rate was $1000/day.

Conclusions:

  • A financial disincentive exists for surgeons treating publicly-insured patients, while hospitals are incentivized to treat them.
  • The converse is true for privately-insured patients, creating a dichotomy in treatment incentives.
  • This reimbursement disparity may hinder the development of new bariatric centers and increase pressure on surgeons to perform less costly open procedures.
Abstract

Related Concept Videos