Médecine

Paramédical

Autres domaines


S'abonner

Skin biopsy and skin cancer treatment use in the Medicare population, 1993 to 2016 - 05/12/20

Doi : 10.1016/j.jaad.2020.06.030 
Robert Skaggs, MD a, b, , Brett Coldiron, MD a, c
a Skin Cancer Center, Cincinnati, Ohio 
b Micrographic Surgery and Dermatologic Oncology, TriHealth-Good Samaritan Hospital, Cincinnati, Ohio 
c University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio 

Reprints available: Robert Skaggs, MD, 1818 Wallace Ct, Ste 301, Bowling Green, KY 42103.1818 Wallace CtSte 301Bowling GreenKY42103

Abstract

Background

Skin biopsies are increasing at a rapid rate, and some may be unnecessary. Although skin cancer incidence is rising, there is varied biopsy accuracy between dermatologists and advanced practice professionals (APPs). A comparison of Current Procedural Terminology code (American Medical Association, Chicago, IL) use for skin biopsy and skin cancer treatment over 18 years and a comparison of provider types is needed. Excess skin biopsies increase health care costs and patient morbidity.

Objective

To examine changes in skin biopsy and skin cancer treatment utilization rates per year in the Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) population and to compare skin biopsy utilization rates between dermatologists and APPs.

Methods

Retrospective cross-sectional study of Medicare FFS paid claims using the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Physician Claims databases. We calculated the number of skin biopsies and skin cancer treatments in the Medicare FFS population from 1993 to 2016, and percentage use by provider type from 2001 to 2016. Our primary outcome measurements were the number of skin biopsies and skin cancer treatments per 1000 Medicare FFS beneficiaries per year and the number of additional skin biopsies per 1000 Medicare FFS beneficiaries per year, or the difference in the number of skin biopsies and number of skin cancer treatments per 1000 Medicare FFS beneficiaries. Our secondary outcome measurements were the skin biopsy-to-skin cancer treatment ratio and the number of procedures per 1000 Medicare FFS beneficiaries per year by provider type.

Results

After adjusting for the number of enrollees in the Medicare FFS population from 1993 to 2016, skin biopsies per 1000 Medicare FFS beneficiaries increased 153% (from 39.31 to 99.33), and skin cancer treatments per 1000 Medicare FFS beneficiaries increased 39% (from 34.67 to 48.26). Between 1993 and 2016, the skin biopsy-to-skin cancer treatment ratio increased 81% (from 1.134 to 2.058), and the number of additional biopsies per 1000 Medicare FFS beneficiaries increased 1001% (from 4.638 to 51.072) between 1993 and 2016. Utilization data by provider type is available from 2001 to 2016. The number of skin biopsies per 1000 Medicare beneficiaries performed by APPs increased from 0.82 to 17.19 or 1996% (nurse practitioners, 2211%; physician assistants, 1916%) and the number of biopsies by dermatologists increased by 41% from 53.98 to 76.17.

Limitations

Medicare claims data do not provide specific information regarding skin biopsy or skin cancer treatment use.

Conclusion

The number of skin biopsies has risen 153% since 1993, while the number of skin cancer treatments has only increased 39%. Our data highlight the rise of biopsy use and the increase in biopsies that do not result in skin cancer diagnosis or treatment. This suggests APPs may be responsible for increasing the cost of skin cancer management by biopsying significantly more benign lesions than dermatologists.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Key words : destruction, excision, Mohs micrographic surgery, skin biopsy, skin cancer

Abbreviations used : APP, CPT, FFS, NNB


Plan


 Funding sources: None.
 Conflicts of interest: None disclosed.
 IRB approval status: Our study was exempted from Institutional Review Board review because it used publicly available deidentified Medicare data.


© 2020  American Academy of Dermatology, Inc.. Publié par Elsevier Masson SAS. Tous droits réservés.
Ajouter à ma bibliothèque Retirer de ma bibliothèque Imprimer
Export

    Export citations

  • Fichier

  • Contenu

Vol 84 - N° 1

P. 53-59 - janvier 2021 Retour au numéro
Article précédent Article précédent
  • The global, regional, and national burden of psoriasis in 195 countries and territories, 1990 to 2017: A systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017
  • Sino Mehrmal, Prabhdeep Uppal, Natalie Nedley, Rachel L. Giesey, Gregory R. Delost
| Article suivant Article suivant
  • Reduced risk of mortality associated with systemic psoriasis treatment in the Psoriasis Longitudinal Assessment and Registry (PSOLAR): A nested case-control analysis
  • Richard G. Langley, Yves Poulin, Bhaskar Srivastava, Kimberly Parnell Lafferty, Steven Fakharzadeh, Wayne Langholff, Matthias Augustin

Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.

Déjà abonné à cette revue ?

Mon compte


Plateformes Elsevier Masson

Déclaration CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM est déclaré à la CNIL, déclaration n° 1286925.

En application de la loi nº78-17 du 6 janvier 1978 relative à l'informatique, aux fichiers et aux libertés, vous disposez des droits d'opposition (art.26 de la loi), d'accès (art.34 à 38 de la loi), et de rectification (art.36 de la loi) des données vous concernant. Ainsi, vous pouvez exiger que soient rectifiées, complétées, clarifiées, mises à jour ou effacées les informations vous concernant qui sont inexactes, incomplètes, équivoques, périmées ou dont la collecte ou l'utilisation ou la conservation est interdite.
Les informations personnelles concernant les visiteurs de notre site, y compris leur identité, sont confidentielles.
Le responsable du site s'engage sur l'honneur à respecter les conditions légales de confidentialité applicables en France et à ne pas divulguer ces informations à des tiers.