DOCSLIB.ORG

Fee-For-Service Payment Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fee-For-Service Payment Analysis Medical Services Plan MSP Fee-For-Service Payment Analysis 2015/2016 - 2019/2020 Health Sector Information, Analysis and Reporting Division If you have any questions about the information presented, please contact the Business Services & Transformation (BST) branch of the Health Sector Information, Analysis and Reporting (HSIAR) Division Ministry of Health All inquiries may be directed to the central intake team at the following email address: [email protected] How to Cite This Document B.C. Ministry of Health, Health Sector Information, Analysis & Reporting Division. MSP Fee-For-Service Payment Analysis 2015/2016 - 2019/2020. October 2020. Table of Contents Preface .......................................................................................................................................4 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 5 Methodology ...............................................................................................................................6 1. Top Fee Items for Current Fiscal Year Table 1-1 Top Fee Item by Expenditure: Medical ..................................................................... 7 Table 1-2 Top Fee Item by Services: Medical .......................................................................... 8 Table 1-3 Top Fee Item by Expenditure: Other Health Practitioners ......................................... 9 Table 1-4 Top Fee Item by Services: Other Health Practitioners ............................................ 10 2. All Fee Items for Five Fiscal Years Table 2-1 Fee-For-Service Payment Analysis 2015/2016 - 2019/2020 ................................... 11 GLOSSARY ................................................................................................................ 121 Preface The Medical Services Plan (MSP) Fee-for-Service Payment Analysis 2015/2016- 2019/2020 is produced by the Health Sector Information, Analysis and Reporting Division. It is a summary of services and expenditure by fee item for each fiscal year. Related publications on MSP data are the MSP Information Resource Manual 2019/2020 and the MSP Physician Resource Report 2010/2011 - 2019/2020. All three reports can be found online, at this address under Fee-for-Service Payment Statistics: http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/health/practitioner-professional-resources/msp/publications. Questions, comments or suggestions regarding this report may be directed to [email protected]. 4 Introduction Under the authority of the Medicare Protection Act, the Medical Services Commission administers MSP. MSP insures registrants for medically required services provided by general practitioners, specialists and other health practitioners. MSP pays practitioners on a fee-for- service and on an alternative payment basis. The MSP Fee-for-Service Payment Analysis summarizes services and expenditure by fee item for each fiscal year. These figures are based on fee-for-service payments made to British Columbia practitioners by MSP for services provided to MSP registrants. Short fee item descriptions are included. Please refer to the Medical Services Commission Payment Schedule for a more detailed description of fee items. The current payment schedule can be viewed online at: http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/health/practitioner-professional- resources/msp/physicians/payment-schedules/msc-payment-schedule The Methodology section outlines general data inclusions and exclusions that apply throughout the manual. A glossary has been provided at the end of the manual to explain terms used in the publication. Readers are encouraged to refer to the glossary to ensure accurate interpretation of the statistics presented. 5 Methodology The data used to generate statistics in this manual include MSP fee-for-service payments made to general practitioners, specialists and other health practitioners for insured services provided to MSP registrants. Only services performed in a given fiscal year (April 1st to March 31st) and paid on or before September 30th of the following fiscal year are included. General Data Inclusions • Expenditures paid by MSP, including the adjudicated fee schedule amount, retroactive payments, rural retention program payments and tray fees • Expenditures paid to physicians for services referred by registered midwives or nurse practitioners • With the implementation of the Laboratory Services Act on October 1, 2015, fee item values are based on the new Fee-For-Service Outpatient Laboratory Services Payment Schedule, and are subject to change by the Minister of Health • Expenditures for General Practice Services Committee and Specialist Services Committee Initiatives • Services associated with the following service codes (i.e., the service counts in this publication will not match those in the MSP Information Resource Manual 2019/2020): o 09 - General Practice Visit Premiums o 19 - No Charge Referral o 49 - Procedural Premiums o 71 - Tray Fees General Data Exclusions • Interest on late payment of claims • Alternative payments made for contract, salaried, session and other services • Payments for services performed out of province 6 Top 50 Fee Items by Expenditure - 2019/2020 Medical Rank FEE ITEM AND DESCRIPTION Expenditure % of Total Cumulative % 1 100 - VISIT IN OFFICE (AGE 2 - 49) $215,785,387 6.00% 6.00% 2 16100 - VISIT IN OFFICE (AGE 60-69) $102,339,817 2.85% 8.84% 3 17100 - VISIT IN OFFICE (AGE 70-79) $93,444,147 2.60% 11.44% 4 15300 - VISIT IN OFFICE (AGE 50-59) $87,319,261 2.43% 13.87% 5 14033 - GP ANNUAL COMPLEX CARE MANAGEMENT FEE(2 $66,063,734 1.84% 15.71% 6 18100 - VISIT IN OFFICE (AGE 80+) $62,012,147 1.72% 17.43% 7 91000 - PRIMARY BASE FEE $50,517,147 1.40% 18.84% 8 2010 - CONSULTATION - OPHTHALMOLOGY $43,947,391 1.22% 20.06% 9 8695 - TOMOGRAPHY - BODY SCAN DOUBLE SCAN OR TWO REGIONS $42,847,922 1.19% 21.25% 10 33010 - CONSULTATION - CARDIOLOGY $36,352,511 1.01% 22.26% 11 22067 - COMPUTERIZED RETINAL NERVE FIBRE LAYER $30,635,440 0.85% 23.11% 12 90205 - HEMATOLOGY PROFILE $30,450,528 0.85% 23.96% 13 14050 - INCENTIVE FOR MRP FAMILY PHYSICIAN (DIABETES) $29,587,502 0.82% 24.78% 14 311 - GIM - COMPLEX CONSULTATION - 3 MEDICAL CONDITIONS $29,543,456 0.82% 25.60% 15 4010 - CONSULTATION, OB&G $27,543,680 0.77% 26.37% 16 632 - PSYCHOTHERAPY INDIV. (OFF.,OUT-PATIENT) PER HOUR $26,814,825 0.75% 27.11% 17 510 - CONSULTATION, PAEDIATRICS $25,427,741 0.71% 27.82% 18 7010 - CONSULTATION- GENERAL SURGERY $24,984,704 0.69% 28.52% 19 108 - HOSPITAL VISIT $23,858,820 0.66% 29.18% 20 13008 - COMMUNITY BASED GP: HOSPITAL VISIT $23,848,837 0.66% 29.84% 21 8653 - PELVIC B SCAN - NON-OBSTETRICAL $22,704,232 0.63% 30.47% 22 33374 - COLONOSCOPY - REMOVAL OF POLYP $22,473,243 0.62% 31.10% 23 13037 - TELEHEALTH GP IN-OFFICE VISIT $22,393,124 0.62% 31.72% 24 197 - SURGICAL ASSISTANCE - OPERATIONS OVER $529.00 $22,199,180 0.62% 32.34% 25 39 - MANAGEMENT OF MAINTENANCE OPIOID AGONIST TREATMENT $21,979,521 0.61% 32.95% 26 650 - PSYCHOTHERAPY INDIV.(HOSP OR INSTITUT) PER 1/2 HR $21,382,427 0.59% 33.54% 27 2090 - INTRAVITREAL INJECTION OF VITREOUS PARACENTESIS $21,377,551 0.59% 34.14% 28 33091 - ECHOCARDIOGRAM-2-D/M MODE $21,317,518 0.59% 34.73% 29 33310 - CONSULTATION - GASTROENTEROLOGY $21,178,079 0.59% 35.32% 30 630 - PSYCHOTHERAPY INDIV. (OFF.,OUT-PATIENT) PER 1/2 HR $20,773,251 0.58% 35.90% 31 410 - CONSULTATION, NEUROLOGY $20,533,004 0.57% 36.47% 32 8648 - ABDOMINAL B-SCAN $20,027,035 0.56% 37.02% 33 2188 - CATARACT LINEAR EXTRACTION, CONGENITAL, TRAUMATIC $18,820,132 0.52% 37.55% 34 1175 - ANAES. INTENSITY/COMPLEXITY LEVEL 5 - PER 15 MINS $18,448,503 0.51% 38.06% 35 51010 - CONSULTATION - ORTHOPAEDICS $18,372,066 0.51% 38.57% 36 32210 - CONSULTATION, GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE $17,889,504 0.50% 39.07% 37 14052 - INCENTIVE FOR MRP FAMILY PHYSICIAN (HYPERTENSION) $16,589,274 0.46% 39.53% 38 1015 - CONSULTATION , ANAESTHESIA: $15,923,927 0.44% 39.97% 39 1172 - ANAES. INTENSITY/COMPLEXITY LEVEL 2 - PER 15 MINS $14,804,245 0.41% 40.38% 40 14076 - FP PATIENT TELEPHONE MANAGEMENT FEE $14,416,760 0.40% 40.79% 41 8010 - CONSULTATION, UROLOGY $14,147,665 0.39% 41.18% 42 652 - PSYCHOTHERAPY INDIV.(HOSP OR INSTITUT) PER 1 HR $13,849,713 0.39% 41.56% 43 92325 - THYROID STIMULATING HORMONE (TSH) $13,694,189 0.38% 41.94% 44 12100 - VISIT IN OFFICE (AGE 0-1) $13,635,974 0.38% 42.32% 45 1832 - LEVEL II EMERGENCY CARE - NIGHT $13,630,424 0.38% 42.70% 46 2043 - COMPREHENSIVE QUANTITATIVE PERIMETRY EXAMINATION $13,450,721 0.37% 43.08% 47 1207 - SURCHARGE - NONOPERATIVE/WEEKEND AND STAT/HOLIDAY $13,400,234 0.37% 43.45% 48 33210 - CONSULTATION - ENDOCRINOLOGY $13,250,676 0.37% 43.82% 49 90 - MAJOR TRAY $13,109,674 0.36% 44.18% 50 1421 - CRITICAL CARE (ICU) - 2ND TO 7TH DAY (INCL.) $13,051,870 0.36% 44.55% 7 Top 50 Fee Items by Services - 2019/2020 Medical Rank FEE ITEM AND DESCRIPTION Services % of Total Cumulative % 1 100 - VISIT IN OFFICE (AGE 2 - 49) 6,727,948 6.21% 6.21% 2 91000 - PRIMARY BASE FEE 4,408,892 4.07% 10.28% 3 90205 - HEMATOLOGY PROFILE 3,701,343 3.42% 13.69% 4 91421 - CREATININE - SERUM/PLASMA 3,422,581 3.16% 16.85% 5 16100 - VISIT IN OFFICE (AGE 60-69) 2,747,764 2.54% 19.39% 6 92100 - POTASSIUM - SERUM/PLASMA 2,614,553 2.41% 21.80% 7 92231 - SODIUM - SERUM/PLASMA 2,568,796 2.37% 24.17% 8 15300 - VISIT IN OFFICE (AGE 50-59) 2,458,536 2.27% 26.44% 9 17100 - VISIT IN OFFICE (AGE 70-79) 2,219,371 2.05% 28.49% 10 91065 - ALANINE AMINOTRANSFERASE (ALT) 2,127,665 1.96% 30.45% 11 91745 - HEMOGLOBIN, A1C 1,928,581 1.78%
Load more

Recommended publications
  • TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY Experts Speculate That Perhaps Just As Many – Or More - Hit Their Heads and Never Have It Checked Out
    8/1/2019 ‘’POST-CONCUSSION SYNDROME AND VISUAL-VESTIBULAR INTEGRATION DISCLOSURE POLICY DYSFUNCTION” It is the policy of our office, Vincent R. Vicci Jr., O.D., P.A., to state that I have no formal affiliation with other practices, offices, hospitals with the exception of being a staff consultant to the Kessler Institute SEPTEMBER – 2019 for Rehabilitation from which I receive no direct compensation. I have no affiliation with any pharmaceutical company or any company that distributes supplies or instrumentation to doctors and providers of vision care services. I have no copyrighted information, supplies or instrumentation that will be utilized in this presentation. All NEURO-OPTOMETRIC REHABILITATION information supplied during this presentation is based solely upon well established and accepted principles and clinical expertise in the areas LEVEL II EDUCATION discussed. Footnoted materials are presented with all handouts and Power Point presentations. Presentations are prepared and delivered with a high degree of professional conduct to all appropriate VINCENT R. VICCI JR., O.D. participants without discrimination against learners on the basis of gender, age, socioeconomic or ethnic background, sexual orientation WESTFIELD, N.J. or disability. VINCENT R. VICCI JR., O.D., D.P.N.A.P, F.N.O.R.A. • Distinguished Practitioner: National Academies of Practice • Fellow: Neuro-Optometric Rehabilitation Association • Staff consultant - Vision Care Clinics – Kessler Institute for Rehabilitation (West Orange, Saddle Brook, Chester, N.J.) • Consultant: Hartwyck at Oak Tree – J.F.K. Rehabilitation Institute • Seton Hall U.: M.S.O.T. program / yearly guest lecturer • Kean University: O.T. program / yearly guest lecturer • Past President / Co-Founder: Neuro-Optometric Rehabilitation Association (NORA) • Member: O.E.P., N.J.S.O.P, A.O.A.
    [Show full text]
  • I Think with Flying Colours, Express
    J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry: first published as 10.1136/jnnp.50.9.1251 on 1 September 1987. Downloaded from Book reviews 1251 The eight biographies of disabled people differences. In the chapter on neirve blocking Intensive Care and Monitoring of the Neuro- with which the book begins demonstrate the procedures it is most refreshing tto see Charl- surgical. Patient (Progress in Neurological author's skill in empathising with individu- ton's cautious approach, criticalI analysis of Surgery Vol 12.) Edited by AM Landolt. als and outlining important aspects of aging methods and results, and warni ngs ("before (Pp 202; $74.00.) Basel: Karger, 1987. with disability. It is sad that there is no bet- embarking upon neurolytic block everyone ter book covering this topic. Why not? As should read the review of rnedico-legal It is unfortunate that this volume, dedicated the author says, saving lives attracts glam- aspects of complications that may follow to Hugo Krayenbuhl with such a good our and funds which are denied to services these procedures"). He states that intra- biography, has suffered the vicissitudes of for the saved. If this is true of spinal injury thecal use ofcold hypertonic saliine and bar- multiple authorship (so frankly acknowl- and poliomyelitis it is no less true of the botage of CSF "can now be regaLrded as his- edged in the editors' preface that it could be beneficiaries ofother miracles: for example a torical curiosities"; of epidural lblock "there taken as a lament upon this type of book); generation of people with spina bifida and is a distinct lack of published (data on the relatively little of the title is covered by the hydrocephalus now being launched into an injection of neurolytic solutions into the epi- contents, and the relationship of the eight adult world which has made no special dural space"; and neurolytic p;aravertebral contributions is seemingly haphazard.
    [Show full text]
  • Neurosurgery
    March 10, 2017 St Elizabeth Healthcare 9:02 am Privileges for: Neurosurgery Request ST. ELIZABETH - EDGEWOOD ST. ELIZABETH - FLORENCE ST. ELIZABETH - FT. THOMAS ST. ELIZABETH - GRANT CO. (Surgical & other invasive procedures requiring general anesthetic are not offered) MEC Approval: August 27, 2009; Rev. November 15, 2012, February 27, 2014 Board Approval: September 14, 2009; Rev. January 7, 2013, May 5, 2014 DEPARTMENT APPROVAL ________Approved ________Disapproved ___________________________________________ ________________ Department/Section Chair Signature Date MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS Degree required: MD or DO Successful completion of an ACGME or AOA accredited residency in neurosurgery. Note: For Practitoners (excluding AHPs) who apply for membership after March 2, 2009 be and remain (with a lapse of no longer than one year) board certified in their principal practice specialty, or become and remain (with a lapse of no longer than one year) board certified within six years of completion of their post-graduate medical training. Only those boards recognized by the American Board of Medical Specialties or the American Osteopathic Association are acceptable. This board certification requirement does not apply to applicants who on March 2, 2009 were members in good standing on the medical staff of the St. Luke Hospitals or St. Elizabeth Medical Center. PRIVILEGES REQUESTED Pursuant to Bylaws Section 6.1.4, practitioners may exercise the privileges requested and awarded below only at facilities where St. Elizabeth Healthcare offers those services. I. Core Privileges: Core privileges in neurosurgery include the care, treatment or services listed immediately below. I specifically acknowledge that board certification alone does not necessarily qualify me to perform all core privileges or assure competence in all clinical areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Catch One of These Radiology Management Program Webinars
    PROVIDERNews Catch One of These Radiology Management Program Webinars Providers who weren’t able to attend the Radiology Management Program overviews held at our recent Mountain State Provider Workshops will have more opportunities to learn this important information. Twelve webinar sessions have been scheduled in November and December to allow providers to hear tips for how to prepare for the program. Representatives from National Imaging Associates, Inc. (NIA) will conduct two 90-minute sessions on each of the following dates: ® Nov. 16, 2010, 8 a.m. and noon ® Nov. 17, 2010, 8 a.m. and noon ® Dec. 7, 2010, 8 a.m. and noon ® Dec. 8, 2010, 8 a.m. and noon ® Dec. 14, 2010, 8 a.m. and noon ® Dec. 15, 2010, 8 a.m. and noon Registration is required. Please click here to access the registration form. (Continued on page 2) Inside This Edition: Radiology Management Program 2 Prescription Drug Benefit Management Moving 10 Paperless EOB and EFT 2 Watch Your Mail for News about FreedomBlueSM NaviNet® Verification Process 3 PPO and BlueRxSM PDP Changes 11 Mountain State Automates Electronic Changes for Service Benefit Plan FEP Members 11 Professional Claim Adjustments Requests 4 National Consumer Cost Tool Initiative 13 Mountain State to Revise COB Process 6 Mountain State to Update Its List of Procedures Coverage for Certain OTC Medications 6 Requiring Authorization 13 October 2010 Medicare Advantage News 7 Contracting/Reimbursement Update 14 Need help getting ready for ICD-10? 8 Please Note Important Holiday Observances 16 HIPAA News 9 Welcome to Our Newest Groups 16 Procedure Codes Relevant to Dental Services 10 Medical Policy Updates 17 PROVIDERNews Catch One of These Radiology Management Program Webinars (Continued from page 1) You will need a computer with Internet access to view the educational materials presented during the webinar.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment and Management of Infantile Nystagmus Syndrome
    perim Ex en l & ta a l ic O p in l h t C h f Journal of Clinical & Experimental a o l m l a o n l r o Atilla, J Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2016, 7:2 g u y o J Ophthalmology 10.4172/2155-9570.1000550 ISSN: 2155-9570 DOI: Review Article Open Access Assessment and Management of Infantile Nystagmus Syndrome Huban Atilla* Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine, Ankara University, Turkey *Corresponding author: Huban Atilla, Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine, Ankara University, Turkey, Tel: +90 312 4462345; E-mail: [email protected] Received date: March 08, 2016; Accepted date: April 26, 2016; Published date: April 29, 2016 Copyright: © 2016 Atilla H. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Abstract This article is a review of infantile nystagmus syndrome, presenting with an overview of the physiological nystagmus and the etiology, symptoms, clinical evaluation and treatment options. Keywords: Nystagmus syndrome; Physiologic nystagmus phases; active following of the stimulus results in poor correspondence between eye position and stimulus position. At higher velocity targets Introduction (greater than 100 deg/sec) optokinetic nystagmus can no longer be evoked. Unlike simple foveal smooth pursuit, OKN appears to have Nystagmus is a rhythmic, involuntary oscillation of one or both both foveal and peripheral retinal components [3]. Slow phase of the eyes. There are various classifications of nystagmus according to the nystagmus is for following the target and the fast phase is for re- age of onset, etiology, waveform and other characteristics.
    [Show full text]
  • Study of Brain Mechanisms in Temporomandibular Disorder
    A Magnetoencephalographic (MEG) Study of Brain Mechanisms in Temporomandibular Disorder A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Aurelio Abdalla Alonso, DDS, MS IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DR. APOSTOLOS P. GEORGOPOULOS, ADVISER December 2009 © Aurelio Abdalla Alonso, December/2009 Acknowledgments I am thankful to my supervisor, Dr. Apostolos Georgopoulos, whose encouragement, guidance, support, patience and extraordinary mentorship throughout this journey enabled me to develop an understanding of this work. I would like to thank also the facial somesthesia team members: Dr. Art Leuthold for sharing his knowledge on MEG and his help in general; to Dr. Ioannis Koutlas for inviting me to participate in this amazing project, and help during patient collection and processing data; to Dr. Elissaios Karageorgiou for his technical and general help through this journey. My special thank to Dr. Scott Lewis for his time helping during MRI acquisition and consent forms; to Dr. May Tan for her help and patience during my MEG questions. To all Brain Sciences Center members that direct or indirect help me conquer this journey, especially my sincere appreciation to Mrs. Penny Becker and Mrs. Gail Hollstadt that were always there for me when I needed. Dr. Donald Simone, Dr. Alvin Beitz, Dr. Matt Chafee, and Dr. Darryl Hamamoto it was an honor for me to have you as part of my committee, my sincere gratitude. My many thanks to the Oral Biology Program crew: Dr. Mark Herzbeg for his inspirational conversation, and advices; to Michelle Lamere and Ann Hagen for their support during these years.
    [Show full text]
  • Retina Dnb Ophthalmology Question Bank
    DNB Ophthalmology Question Bank Retina and Vitreous 1999-2019 Dr. Krati Gupta Dr. Saurabh Deshmukh www.eyelearn.in RETINA, VITREOUS AND CHOROID A. Retinal vascular disorders 1. Anatomy 2. Diabetic retinopathy a) NPDR b) PDR c) Macular edema 3. Retinal vein occlusion a) BRVO b) CRVO 4. Retinal artery occlusion a) CRAO b) OIS 5. Hypertensive retinopathy 6. Pregnancy related hypertensive retinopathy 7. ROP 8. Coats disease 9. Eales disease 10. Radiation retinopathy B. Acquired macular disorders 1. Anatomy 2. Investigations a) Macular function tests b) FFA c) ICG d) OCT e) OCTA 3. Macular degeneration a) ARMD b) CNVM c) IPCV 4. Vitreomacular interface disorders a) ERM b) Macular hole 5. CSR 6. Submacular hemorrhage 7. Macular surgeries 8. Other macular disorders C. Hereditary Fundus Dystrophies 1. Anatomy a) RPE b) Rods and cones 2. Investigations a) VEP b) ERG c) EOG d) Electronystagmometry 3. RP 4. Retinoschisis 5. Bionic eye D. Retinal Detachment 1. Anatomy Dr. Krati Gupta | Dr. Saurabh Deshmukh 2. Investigations a) USG 3. Peripheral retinal degenerations 4. Retinal tears and breaks 5. GRT 6. Retinal Detachment a) RRD b) TRD c) ERD 7. Retinal detachment surgery a) Vitrectomy b) Scleral buckle c) SRF Drainage 8. Vitreous substitutes a) Air b) Gas c) Silicon Oil d) PFCL E. Drugs and LASER 1. Intravitreal drugs a) Steroids b) Anti- VEGF agents 2. Retinal LASERS a) Retinal Micropulsed LASER b) PDT c) TTT F. Vitreous and choroid 1. Vitreous a) Vitreous hemorrhage b) Terson’s syndrome c) PHPV Asteroid hyalosis 2. Choroid a) Choroidal coloboma b) Choroidal effusion G.
    [Show full text]
  • Coding Pain Management Services Notes/Comments/Questions
    Coding Pain Management Services Audio Seminar/Webinar April 3, 2008 Practical Tools for Seminar Learning © Copyright 2008 American Health Information Management Association. All rights reserved. Disclaimer The American Health Information Management Association makes no representation or guarantee with respect to the contents herein and specifically disclaims any implied guarantee of suitability for any specific purpose. AHIMA has no liability or responsibility to any person or entity with respect to any loss or damage caused by the use of this audio seminar, including but not limited to any loss of revenue, interruption of service, loss of business, or indirect damages resulting from the use of this program. AHIMA makes no guarantee that the use of this program will prevent differences of opinion or disputes with Medicare or other third party payers as to the amount that will be paid to providers of service. CPT® five digit codes, nomenclature, and other data are copyright 2007 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved. No fee schedules, basic units, relative values or related listings are included in CPT. The AMA assumes no liability for the data contained herein. As a provider of continuing education, the American Health Information Management Association (AHIMA) must assure balance, independence, objectivity and scientific rigor in all of its endeavors. AHIMA is solely responsible for control of program objectives and content and the selection of presenters. All speakers and planning committee members are expected to disclose to the audience: (1) any significant financial interest or other relationships with the manufacturer(s) or provider(s) of any commercial product(s) or services(s) discussed in an educational presentation; (2) any significant financial interest or other relationship with any companies providing commercial support for the activity; and (3) if the presentation will include discussion of investigational or unlabeled uses of a product.
    [Show full text]
  • Interventional Physiatry
    Interventional Physiatry Diagnosis Medical Branch Block & Radiofrequency Ablation Treatment Prepared by: Tufts PM&R Medical staff Overview and indications for procedure: Lumbar Facet joints (also known as the Zygapophysial joints or Z-joints) are paired structures on both side of your spine that allows movement between two vertebrae. When a facet joints are strained (car accident, fall, injuries) ,degenerative changes settles in these joints or there is a shift between two vertebrae (spondylolisthesis) , the joints could become the source of back pain. Pain may be localized to the lower back or radiating to the buttock, posterior hamstring, groin area or to side of the legs (colored figure credit: Nature Reviews Rheumatology 9 , 216-224 , April 2013) . Medial branch block: Pain information from the facet joints travels to the brain via small nerve endings called medial branches. In order to determine whether or not the facet joint are causing pain, medial branch nerves could be diagnostically blocked and patient can determine whether or not there was a changes in their pain after the procedure. Medial branch block (MBB) is performed twice to confirm the correct diagnoses and the correct number of facets contributing to pain. Clinicians are looking for improvement of pain between 50 - 100% after each diagnostic block. When patient experiences significant reduced pain with diagnostic medical branch injections on 2 separate occasions, he/ she is considered a good candidate to proceed to radiofrequency ablation treatment. Radiofrequency ablation treatment: This procedure is performed after diagnostic medial branch injection is performed and it is determined (with a reasonable degree of certainty) that facet joints are the source of individuals back pain.
    [Show full text]
  • Endoscopic Rhizotomy for Chronic Lumbar Zygapophysial Joint Pain
    Xue et al. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research (2020) 15:4 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-019-1533-y RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Endoscopic rhizotomy for chronic lumbar zygapophysial joint pain Yuntao Xue1, Tao Ding1* , Dajie Wang2, Jianli Zhao3, Huilin Yang4, Xiaofeng Gu1, Dehong Feng1, Yafeng Zhang5, Hao Liu6, Fenglin Tang1, Wanyi Wang1, Miao Lu1 and Chao Wu7 Abstract Background: Chronic lumbar zygapophysial joint pain is a common cause of chronic low back pain. Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is one of the effective management options; however, the results from the traditional RFA need to be improved in certain cases. The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation under endoscopic guidance (ERFA) for chronic low back pain secondary to facet joint arthritis. Methods: This is a prospective study enrolled 60 patients. The cases were randomized into two groups: 30 patients in the control group underwent traditional percutaneous radiofrequency ablation, others underwent ERFA. The lumbar visual analog scale (VAS), MacNab score, and postoperative complications were used to evaluate the outcomes. All outcome assessments were performed at postoperative 1 day, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months. Results: There was no difference between the two groups in preoperative VAS (P > 0.05). VAS scores, except the postoperative first day, in all other postoperative time points were significantly lower than preoperative values each in both groups (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in VAS at 1 day, 1 month, and 3 months after surgery (P > 0.05). However, the EFRA demonstrated significant benefits at the time points of 3 months and 6 months (P > 0.05).
    [Show full text]
  • Diffusion Tensor Imaging for Assessment of Microstructural
    Chen et al. BMC Neurology (2019) 19:62 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-019-1295-5 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Diffusion tensor imaging for assessment of microstructural changes associate with treatment outcome at one-year after radiofrequency Rhizotomy in trigeminal neuralgia Shu-Tian Chen1, Jen-Tsung Yang2, Hsu-Huei Weng1, Hsueh-Lin Wang1, Mei-Yu Yeh3 and Yuan-Hsiung Tsai1* Abstract Background: Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is characterized by facial pain that may be sudden, intense, and recurrent. Neurosurgical interventions, such as radiofrequency rhizotomy, can relieve TN pain, but their mechanisms and effects are unknown. The aim of the present study was to investigate the microstructural tissue changes of the trigeminal nerve (TGN) in patients with TN after they underwent radiofrequency rhizotomy. Methods: Thirty-seven patients with TN were recruited, and diffusion tensor imaging was obtained before and two weeks after radiofrequency rhizotomy. By manually selecting the cisternal segment of the TGN, we measured the volume of the TGN, fractional anisotropy (FA), apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), axial diffusivity (AD), and radial diffusivity (RD). The TGN volume and mean value of the DTI metrics of the post-rhizotomy lesion side were compared with those of the normal side and those of the pre-rhizotomy lesion side, and they were correlated to the post-rhizotomy visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores after a one-year follow-up. Results: The alterations before and after rhizotomy showed a significantly increased TGN volume and FA, and a decreased ADC, AD, and RD. The post-rhizotomy lesion side showed a significantly decreased TGN volume, FA, and AD compared with the normal side; however, no significant difference in the ADC and RD were found between the groups.
    [Show full text]
  • LETTERS to the EDITOR. Middle Cerebral Artery Tortuosity Associated
    J Neurosurg 130:1763–1788, 2019 Neurosurgical Forum LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Middle cerebral artery tortuosity tective factors against aneurysm formation.” Nevertheless, according to that explanation, it can be inferred that the associated with aneurysm incidence of aneurysms in patients with local tortuosity development should be decreased rather than increased. Therefore, it would be better for the authors to provide an in-depth ex- planation about the above results and arguments. TO THE EDITOR: We read with great interest the ar- Second, the authors stated, “There are a few rare ge- ticle by Kliś et al.2 (Kliś KM, Krzyżewski RM, Kwinta netic syndromes that are linked to the presence of vessel BM, et al: Computer-aided analysis of middle cerebral tortuosity, such as artery tortuosity syndrome or Loeys- artery tortuosity: association with aneurysm develop- Dietz syndrome.” The genetic syndromes they mention ment. J Neurosurg [epub ahead of print May 18, 2018; are systemic lesions involving multiple parts of vessels DOI: 10.3171/2017.12.JNS172114]). The authors conclude of the body and therefore often involve multiple intracra- that “an increased deviation of the middle cerebral artery nial aneurysms.1,3,5 However, this article did not provide (MCA) from a straight axis (described by relative length detailed information on the characteristics of intracranial [RL]), a decreased sum of all MCA angles (described by aneurysms, for example, the incidence of multiple aneu- sum of angle metrics [SOAM]), a local increase of the rysms, the specific sites of the MCA aneurysms (M1, M2, MCA angle heterogeneity, and an increase in changes in M3, M4), and the size of the aneurysms, etc.
    [Show full text]