P Braun1, J Dernburg, D L Dunn
1Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA.
This study examined how to better define medical billing codes for evaluation and management services so they more accurately reflect the work involved. Using data from a large survey of physicians across 31 specialties, researchers found that the time spent on a service is the strongest predictor of work effort. Other factors, like the location of the service and the patient's status, also play a role. The study suggests that including time as a factor in billing codes could improve their accuracy and better align them with resource costs. These findings could help refine billing systems like the Medicare Fee Schedule to ensure fair and accurate payment for physician work.
You might also read
Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.
Area of Science:
Background:
Current procedural terminology (CPT) codes for evaluation and management services do not consistently reflect the amount of work involved. Prior research has shown that the same CPT codes can represent services with different work levels, and different codes can represent services with the same work levels. This inconsistency creates challenges when transitioning to payment systems like the Medicare Fee Schedule, which rely on accurate cost reflection. No prior work had resolved how to align CPT codes with resource costs. That uncertainty drove the need to identify verifiable predictors of physician work. The shift to resource-based payment systems required a better understanding of how variables like time and patient status relate to work effort. This gap motivated the use of data from the Resource-Based Relative Value Scale (RBRVS) study to explore these relationships. Prior research had not included time as a factor in defining CPT codes for these services. This study aimed to address that limitation by analyzing how variables influence work effort and code accuracy.
Intraservice time is the strongest predictor, accounting for 90% of the variance in work effort.
Intraservice time refers to the amount of time a physician spends directly on a specific service during a patient visit.
Including time improves code accuracy by aligning billing with the actual resource costs of services.
Site of service, visit type, patient status, and referral status also contribute to predicting work effort.
Purpose Of The Study:
The goal was to redefine CPT codes for evaluation and management services so that they accurately reflect the resource costs of physician work. The study aimed to identify verifiable predictors of work effort that could be used to refine these codes. The specific problem was the inconsistency between CPT codes and the actual work involved in services. The motivation was to improve accuracy in billing systems like the Medicare Fee Schedule. This required analyzing how variables like time, patient status, and visit type influence work effort. The study focused on data from the RBRVS study involving 377 services across 31 specialties. The objective was to determine which variables most strongly predict physician work. The researchers proposed that refining codes based on these predictors would improve alignment with resource costs.
Main Methods:
The study used data from the Resource-Based Relative Value Scale (RBRVS) study, which surveyed 377 services across 31 specialties. Multiple regression analyses were performed to assess the relationship between variables and the mean values of work effort. The primary data source was the RBRVS dataset, which included information on physician work for various services. Variables included intraservice time, site of service, visit type, patient status, and referral status. The regression models aimed to identify which variables best predicted work effort. Intraservice time was found to be the most significant variable, accounting for 90% of the variance. Other variables were also examined for their predictive value. The analysis focused on how these variables could be used to refine CPT codes to better reflect resource costs.
Main Results:
Intraservice time was the strongest predictor of physician work, accounting for 90% of the variance in the regression models. This finding suggests that time spent on a service is a critical factor in determining work effort. Other significant predictors included site of service, visit type, patient status, and referral status. These variables contributed to the overall prediction of work effort but to a lesser extent than intraservice time. The study confirmed that time had not previously been included in CPT code definitions for these services. Including time as a factor improved the accuracy of code definitions in relation to resource costs. The results indicate that refining codes based on time and other variables could enhance alignment with actual work effort. These findings provide a basis for redefining CPT codes to better reflect resource costs.
Conclusions:
The study found that intraservice time is the most important predictor of physician work for evaluation and management services. The authors proposed that including time as a factor in CPT code definitions would improve their accuracy in reflecting resource costs. Other variables, such as site of service and patient status, also contribute to work effort but to a lesser extent. These findings suggest that refining codes based on these predictors could enhance billing accuracy. The researchers proposed that the Medicare Fee Schedule and similar systems could benefit from these refinements. The study did not claim that these variables are the only factors influencing work effort. The authors emphasized that aligning codes with resource costs requires a multifaceted approach. These conclusions are based on the data from the RBRVS study and the regression analyses performed.
Patient status, such as new or established, influences the complexity and time required for services.
The study suggests that refining CPT codes using verifiable predictors could improve alignment with resource costs.