User login
A Cross-sectional Analysis of Regional Trends in Medicare Reimbursement for Phototherapy Services From 2010 to 2023
To the Editor:
Phototherapy regularly is utilized in the outpatient setting to address various skin pathologies, including atopic dermatitis, psoriasis, pruritus, vitiligo, and mycosis fungoides.1,2 Phototherapy is broadly defined by the measured administration of nonionizing radiation within the UV range including wavelengths within the UVA (eg, psoralen sensitizer plus UVA-1) and UVB (eg, broadband UVB, narrowband UVB) spectrums.1,3 Generally, the mechanism of action is derived from effects on inflammatory components of cutaneous disorders and the induction of apoptosis, both precipitating numerous downstream events.4
From 2015 to 2018, there were more than 1.3 million outpatient phototherapy visits in the United States, with the most common procedural indications being dermatitis not otherwise specified, atopic dermatitis, and pruritus.5 From 2000 to 2015, the quantity of phototherapy services billed to Medicare trended upwards by an average of 5% per year, increasing from 334,670 in the year 2000 to 692,093 in 2015.6 Therefore, an illustration of associated costs would be beneficial. Additionally, because total cost and physician reimbursement fluctuate from year to year, studies demonstrating overall trends can inform both US policymakers and physicians. There is a paucity of research on geographical trends for procedural reimbursements in dermatology for phototherapy. Understanding geographic trends of reimbursement could duly serve to optimize dermatologist practice patterns involving access to viable and quality care for patients seeking treatment as well as draw health policymakers’ attention to striking adjustments in physician fees. Therefore, in this study we aimed to illustrate the most recent regional payment trends in phototherapy procedures for Medicare B patients.
We queried the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (MPFS) database (https://www.cms.gov/medicare/payment/fee-schedules/physician/lookup-tool) for the years 2010 to 2023 for Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes common to phototherapy procedures: actinotherapy (96900); photochemotherapy by Goeckerman treatment or using petrolatum and UVB (96910); photochemotherapy using psoralen plus UVA (96912); and photochemotherapy of severe dermatoses requiring a minimum of 4 hours of care under direct physician supervision (96913). Nonfacility prices for these procedures were analyzed. For 2010, due to midyear alterations to Medicare reimbursement (owed to bills HR 3962 and HR 4872), the mean price data of MPFS files 2010A and 2010B were used. All dollar values were converted to January 2023 US dollars using corresponding consumer price index inflation data. The Medicare Administrative Contractors were used to group state pricing information by region in accordance with established US Census Bureau subdivisions (https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/economic-census/guidance-geographies/levels.html). Weighted percentage change in reimbursement rate was calculated using physician (MD or DO) utilization (procedure volume) data available in the 2020 Physician and Other Practitioners Public Use File (https://data.cms.gov/provider-summary-by-type-of-service/medicare-physician-other-practitioners/medicare-physician-other-practitioners-by-provider-and-service). All descriptive statistics and visualization were generated using R software (v4.2.2)(R Development Core Team).
Table 1 provides physician utilization data and the corresponding number of Part B beneficiaries for phototherapy procedures in 2020. There were 65,045 services of actinotherapy provided to a total of 6855 unique Part B beneficiaries, 173,979 services of photochemotherapy by Goeckerman treatment or using petrolatum and UVB provided to 13,122 unique Part B beneficiaries, 2524 services of photochemotherapy using psoralen plus UVA provided to a total of 357 unique Part B beneficiaries, and 37 services of photochemotherapy of severe dermatoses requiring a minimum of 4 hours of care under direct physician supervision provided to a total of 27 unique Part B beneficiaries.
On average (unweighted), phototherapy reimbursement rates in the North increased by 0.68% between 2010 and 2023 (Table 2). After weighting for 2020 physician utilization, the average change in reimbursement rate was +19.37%. During this time period, CPT code 96910 reported the greatest adjusted increase in reimbursement (+31.45%)($98.12 to $128.98; compound annual growth rate [CAGR], +0.0213), and CPT code 96912 reported the greatest adjusted decrease in reimbursement (−12.76%)($126.09 to $109.97; CAGR, −0.0105). For CPT code 96900, the reported adjusted decrease in reimbursement was −11.68% ($30.21 to $26.68; CAGR, −0.0095), and for CPT code 96913, the reported adjusted decrease in reimbursement was −4.27% ($174.03 to $166.60; CAGR, −0.0034).
On average (unweighted), phototherapy reimbursement rates in the Midwest increased by 8.40% between 2010 and 2023 (Table 3). After weighting for 2020 physician utilization, the average change in reimbursement rate was +28.53%. During this time period, CPT code 96910 reported the greatest adjusted change in reimbursement (+41.48%)($80.42 to $113.78; CAGR, +0.0270), and CPT code 96912 reported the greatest adjusted decrease in reimbursement (−6.14%)($103.28 to $97.03; CAGR, −0.0049). For CPT code 96900, the reported adjusted decrease in reimbursement was −4.73% ($24.69 to $23.52; CAGR, −0.0037), and for CPT code 96913, the reported adjusted increase in reimbursement was +2.99% ($142.72 to $146.99; CAGR, +0.0023).
On average (unweighted), phototherapy reimbursement rates in the South decreased by 2.62% between 2010 and 2023 (Table 4). After weighting for 2020 physician utilization, the average change in reimbursement rate was +15.41%. During this time period, CPT code 96910 reported the greatest adjusted change in reimbursement (+27.26%)($90.40 to $115.04 USD; CAGR, +0.0187), and CPT code 96912 reported the greatest adjusted decrease in reimbursement (−15.50%)($116.08 to $98.09; CAGR, −0.0129). For CPT code 96900, the reported adjusted decrease in reimbursement was −15.06% ($28.02 to $23.80; CAGR, −0.0125), and for CPT code 96913, the reported adjusted decrease in reimbursement was −7.19% ($160.11 to $148.61; CAGR, −0.0057).
On average (unweighted), phototherapy reimbursement rates in the West increased by 27.53% between 2010 and 2023 (Table 5). After weighting for 2020 physician utilization, the average change in reimbursement rate was +51.16%. Reimbursement for all analyzed procedures increased in the western United States. During this time period, CPT code 96910 reported the greatest adjusted increase in reimbursement (+66.56%)($80.84 to $134.65; CAGR, +0.0400), and CPT code 96912 reported the lowest adjusted increase in reimbursement (+10.64%)($103.88 to $114.93; CAGR, +0.0078). For CPT code 96900, the reported adjusted increase in reimbursement was 11.54% ($24.88 to $27.75; CAGR, +0.0084), and for CPT code 96913, the reported adjusted increase in reimbursement was 21.38% ($143.39 to $174.04; CAGR, +0.0150).
In this study evaluating geographical payment trends for phototherapy from 2010 to 2023, we demonstrated regional inconsistency in mean inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement rates. We found that all phototherapy procedures had increased reimbursement in the western United States, whereas all other regions reported cuts in reimbursement rates for at least half of the analyzed procedures. After adjusting for procedure utilization by physicians, weighted mean reimbursement for phototherapy increased in all US regions.
In a cross-sectional study that explored trends in the geographic distribution of dermatologists from 2012 to 2017, dermatologists in the northeastern and western United States were more likely to be located in higher-income zip codes, whereas dermatologists in the southern United States were more likely to be located in lower-income zip codes,7 suggesting that payment rate changes are not concordant with cost of living. Additionally, Lauck and colleagues8 observed that 75% of the top 20 most common procedures performed by dermatologists had decreased reimbursement (mean change, −10.8%) from 2011 to 2021. Other studies on Medicare reimbursement trends over the last 2 decades have reported major decreases within other specialties, suggesting that declining Medicare reimbursements are not unique to dermatology.9,10 It is critical to monitor these developments, as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services emphasized health care policy changes aimed at increasing reimbursements for evaluation and management services with compensatory payment cuts in billing for procedural services.11
Mazmudar et al12 previously reported a mean reimbursement decrease of −6.6% for laser/phototherapy procedures between 2007 and 2021, but these data did not include the heavily utilized Goeckerman treatment. Changes in reimbursement pose major ramifications for dermatologists—for practice size, scope, and longevity—as rates influence changes in commercial insurance reimbursements.13 Medicare plays a major role in the US health care system as the second largest expenditure14; indeed, between 2000 and 2015, Part B billing volume for phototherapy procedures increased 5% annually. However, phototherapy remains inaccessible in many locations due to unequal regional distribution of phototherapy clinics.6 Moreover, home phototherapy units are not yet widely utilized because of safety and efficacy concerns, lack of physician oversight, and difficulty obtaining insurance coverage.15 Acknowledgment and consideration of these geographical trends may persuasively allow policymakers, hospitals, and physicians to facilitate cost-effective phototherapy reimbursements that ensure continued access to quality and sustainable dermatologic care in the United States that tailor to regional needs.
In sum, this analysis reveals regional trends in Part B physician reimbursement for phototherapy procedures, with all US regions reporting a mean increase in phototherapy reimbursement after adjusting for utilization, albeit to varying degrees. Mean reimbursement for photochemotherapy by Goeckerman treatment or using petrolatum and UVB increased most among phototherapy procedures. Mean reimbursement for both actinotherapy and photochemotherapy using psoralen plus UVA decreased in all regions except the western United States.
Limitations include the restriction to Part B MPFS and the reliance on single-year (2020) physician utilization data to compute weighted changes in average reimbursement across a multiyear range, effectively restricting sweeping conclusions. Still, this study puts forth actionable insights for dermatologists and policymakers alike to appreciate and consider.
- Rathod DG, Muneer H, Masood S. Phototherapy. StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; 2002.
- Branisteanu DE, Dirzu DS, Toader MP, et al. Phototherapy in dermatological maladies (Review). Exp Ther Med. 2022;23:259. doi:10.3892/etm.2022.11184
- Barros NM, Sbroglio LL, Buffara MO, et al. Phototherapy. An Bras Dermatol. 2021;96:397-407. doi:10.1016/j.abd.2021.03.001
- Vieyra-Garcia PA, Wolf P. A deep dive into UV-based phototherapy: mechanisms of action and emerging molecular targets in inflammation and cancer. Pharmacol Ther. 2021;222:107784. doi:10.1016/j.pharmthera.2020.107784
- Oulee A, Javadi SS, Martin A, et al. Phototherapy trends in dermatology 2015-2018. J Dermatolog Treat. 2022;33:2545-2546. doi:10.1080/09546634.2021.2019660
- Tan SY, Buzney E, Mostaghimi A. Trends in phototherapy utilization among Medicare beneficiaries in the United States, 2000 to 2015. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;79:672-679. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2018.03.018
- Benlagha I, Nguyen BM. Changes in dermatology practice characteristics in the United States from 2012 to 2017. JAAD Int. 2021;3:92-101. doi:10.1016/j.jdin.2021.03.005
- Lauck K, Nguyen QB, Hebert A. Trends in Medicare reimbursement within dermatology: 2011-2021. Skin. 2022;6:122-131. doi:10.25251/skin.6.2.5
- Smith JF, Moore ML, Pollock JR, et al. National and geographic trends in Medicare reimbursement rates for orthopedic shoulder and upper extremity surgery from 2000 to 2020. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2022;31:860-867. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2021.09.001
- Haglin JM, Eltorai AEM, Richter KR, et al. Medicare reimbursement for general surgery procedures: 2000 to 2018. Ann Surg. 2020;271:17-22. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000003289
- Fleishon HB. Evaluation and management coding initiative. J Am Coll Radiol. 2020;17:1539-1540. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2020.09.057
- Mazmudar RS, Sheth A, Tripathi R, et al. Inflation-adjusted trends in Medicare reimbursement for common dermatologic procedures, 2007-2021. JAMA Dermatol. 2021;157:1355-1358. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2021.3453
- Clemens J, Gottlieb JD. In the shadow of a giant: Medicare’s influence on private physician payments. J Polit Econ. 2017;125:1-39. doi:10.1086/689772
- Ya J, Ezaldein HH, Scott JF. Trends in Medicare utilization by dermatologists, 2012-2015. JAMA Dermatol. 2019;155:471-474. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2018.4212
- Rajpara AN, O’Neill JL, Nolan BV, et al. Review of home phototherapy. Dermatol Online J. 2010;16:2.
To the Editor:
Phototherapy regularly is utilized in the outpatient setting to address various skin pathologies, including atopic dermatitis, psoriasis, pruritus, vitiligo, and mycosis fungoides.1,2 Phototherapy is broadly defined by the measured administration of nonionizing radiation within the UV range including wavelengths within the UVA (eg, psoralen sensitizer plus UVA-1) and UVB (eg, broadband UVB, narrowband UVB) spectrums.1,3 Generally, the mechanism of action is derived from effects on inflammatory components of cutaneous disorders and the induction of apoptosis, both precipitating numerous downstream events.4
From 2015 to 2018, there were more than 1.3 million outpatient phototherapy visits in the United States, with the most common procedural indications being dermatitis not otherwise specified, atopic dermatitis, and pruritus.5 From 2000 to 2015, the quantity of phototherapy services billed to Medicare trended upwards by an average of 5% per year, increasing from 334,670 in the year 2000 to 692,093 in 2015.6 Therefore, an illustration of associated costs would be beneficial. Additionally, because total cost and physician reimbursement fluctuate from year to year, studies demonstrating overall trends can inform both US policymakers and physicians. There is a paucity of research on geographical trends for procedural reimbursements in dermatology for phototherapy. Understanding geographic trends of reimbursement could duly serve to optimize dermatologist practice patterns involving access to viable and quality care for patients seeking treatment as well as draw health policymakers’ attention to striking adjustments in physician fees. Therefore, in this study we aimed to illustrate the most recent regional payment trends in phototherapy procedures for Medicare B patients.
We queried the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (MPFS) database (https://www.cms.gov/medicare/payment/fee-schedules/physician/lookup-tool) for the years 2010 to 2023 for Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes common to phototherapy procedures: actinotherapy (96900); photochemotherapy by Goeckerman treatment or using petrolatum and UVB (96910); photochemotherapy using psoralen plus UVA (96912); and photochemotherapy of severe dermatoses requiring a minimum of 4 hours of care under direct physician supervision (96913). Nonfacility prices for these procedures were analyzed. For 2010, due to midyear alterations to Medicare reimbursement (owed to bills HR 3962 and HR 4872), the mean price data of MPFS files 2010A and 2010B were used. All dollar values were converted to January 2023 US dollars using corresponding consumer price index inflation data. The Medicare Administrative Contractors were used to group state pricing information by region in accordance with established US Census Bureau subdivisions (https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/economic-census/guidance-geographies/levels.html). Weighted percentage change in reimbursement rate was calculated using physician (MD or DO) utilization (procedure volume) data available in the 2020 Physician and Other Practitioners Public Use File (https://data.cms.gov/provider-summary-by-type-of-service/medicare-physician-other-practitioners/medicare-physician-other-practitioners-by-provider-and-service). All descriptive statistics and visualization were generated using R software (v4.2.2)(R Development Core Team).
Table 1 provides physician utilization data and the corresponding number of Part B beneficiaries for phototherapy procedures in 2020. There were 65,045 services of actinotherapy provided to a total of 6855 unique Part B beneficiaries, 173,979 services of photochemotherapy by Goeckerman treatment or using petrolatum and UVB provided to 13,122 unique Part B beneficiaries, 2524 services of photochemotherapy using psoralen plus UVA provided to a total of 357 unique Part B beneficiaries, and 37 services of photochemotherapy of severe dermatoses requiring a minimum of 4 hours of care under direct physician supervision provided to a total of 27 unique Part B beneficiaries.
On average (unweighted), phototherapy reimbursement rates in the North increased by 0.68% between 2010 and 2023 (Table 2). After weighting for 2020 physician utilization, the average change in reimbursement rate was +19.37%. During this time period, CPT code 96910 reported the greatest adjusted increase in reimbursement (+31.45%)($98.12 to $128.98; compound annual growth rate [CAGR], +0.0213), and CPT code 96912 reported the greatest adjusted decrease in reimbursement (−12.76%)($126.09 to $109.97; CAGR, −0.0105). For CPT code 96900, the reported adjusted decrease in reimbursement was −11.68% ($30.21 to $26.68; CAGR, −0.0095), and for CPT code 96913, the reported adjusted decrease in reimbursement was −4.27% ($174.03 to $166.60; CAGR, −0.0034).
On average (unweighted), phototherapy reimbursement rates in the Midwest increased by 8.40% between 2010 and 2023 (Table 3). After weighting for 2020 physician utilization, the average change in reimbursement rate was +28.53%. During this time period, CPT code 96910 reported the greatest adjusted change in reimbursement (+41.48%)($80.42 to $113.78; CAGR, +0.0270), and CPT code 96912 reported the greatest adjusted decrease in reimbursement (−6.14%)($103.28 to $97.03; CAGR, −0.0049). For CPT code 96900, the reported adjusted decrease in reimbursement was −4.73% ($24.69 to $23.52; CAGR, −0.0037), and for CPT code 96913, the reported adjusted increase in reimbursement was +2.99% ($142.72 to $146.99; CAGR, +0.0023).
On average (unweighted), phototherapy reimbursement rates in the South decreased by 2.62% between 2010 and 2023 (Table 4). After weighting for 2020 physician utilization, the average change in reimbursement rate was +15.41%. During this time period, CPT code 96910 reported the greatest adjusted change in reimbursement (+27.26%)($90.40 to $115.04 USD; CAGR, +0.0187), and CPT code 96912 reported the greatest adjusted decrease in reimbursement (−15.50%)($116.08 to $98.09; CAGR, −0.0129). For CPT code 96900, the reported adjusted decrease in reimbursement was −15.06% ($28.02 to $23.80; CAGR, −0.0125), and for CPT code 96913, the reported adjusted decrease in reimbursement was −7.19% ($160.11 to $148.61; CAGR, −0.0057).
On average (unweighted), phototherapy reimbursement rates in the West increased by 27.53% between 2010 and 2023 (Table 5). After weighting for 2020 physician utilization, the average change in reimbursement rate was +51.16%. Reimbursement for all analyzed procedures increased in the western United States. During this time period, CPT code 96910 reported the greatest adjusted increase in reimbursement (+66.56%)($80.84 to $134.65; CAGR, +0.0400), and CPT code 96912 reported the lowest adjusted increase in reimbursement (+10.64%)($103.88 to $114.93; CAGR, +0.0078). For CPT code 96900, the reported adjusted increase in reimbursement was 11.54% ($24.88 to $27.75; CAGR, +0.0084), and for CPT code 96913, the reported adjusted increase in reimbursement was 21.38% ($143.39 to $174.04; CAGR, +0.0150).
In this study evaluating geographical payment trends for phototherapy from 2010 to 2023, we demonstrated regional inconsistency in mean inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement rates. We found that all phototherapy procedures had increased reimbursement in the western United States, whereas all other regions reported cuts in reimbursement rates for at least half of the analyzed procedures. After adjusting for procedure utilization by physicians, weighted mean reimbursement for phototherapy increased in all US regions.
In a cross-sectional study that explored trends in the geographic distribution of dermatologists from 2012 to 2017, dermatologists in the northeastern and western United States were more likely to be located in higher-income zip codes, whereas dermatologists in the southern United States were more likely to be located in lower-income zip codes,7 suggesting that payment rate changes are not concordant with cost of living. Additionally, Lauck and colleagues8 observed that 75% of the top 20 most common procedures performed by dermatologists had decreased reimbursement (mean change, −10.8%) from 2011 to 2021. Other studies on Medicare reimbursement trends over the last 2 decades have reported major decreases within other specialties, suggesting that declining Medicare reimbursements are not unique to dermatology.9,10 It is critical to monitor these developments, as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services emphasized health care policy changes aimed at increasing reimbursements for evaluation and management services with compensatory payment cuts in billing for procedural services.11
Mazmudar et al12 previously reported a mean reimbursement decrease of −6.6% for laser/phototherapy procedures between 2007 and 2021, but these data did not include the heavily utilized Goeckerman treatment. Changes in reimbursement pose major ramifications for dermatologists—for practice size, scope, and longevity—as rates influence changes in commercial insurance reimbursements.13 Medicare plays a major role in the US health care system as the second largest expenditure14; indeed, between 2000 and 2015, Part B billing volume for phototherapy procedures increased 5% annually. However, phototherapy remains inaccessible in many locations due to unequal regional distribution of phototherapy clinics.6 Moreover, home phototherapy units are not yet widely utilized because of safety and efficacy concerns, lack of physician oversight, and difficulty obtaining insurance coverage.15 Acknowledgment and consideration of these geographical trends may persuasively allow policymakers, hospitals, and physicians to facilitate cost-effective phototherapy reimbursements that ensure continued access to quality and sustainable dermatologic care in the United States that tailor to regional needs.
In sum, this analysis reveals regional trends in Part B physician reimbursement for phototherapy procedures, with all US regions reporting a mean increase in phototherapy reimbursement after adjusting for utilization, albeit to varying degrees. Mean reimbursement for photochemotherapy by Goeckerman treatment or using petrolatum and UVB increased most among phototherapy procedures. Mean reimbursement for both actinotherapy and photochemotherapy using psoralen plus UVA decreased in all regions except the western United States.
Limitations include the restriction to Part B MPFS and the reliance on single-year (2020) physician utilization data to compute weighted changes in average reimbursement across a multiyear range, effectively restricting sweeping conclusions. Still, this study puts forth actionable insights for dermatologists and policymakers alike to appreciate and consider.
To the Editor:
Phototherapy regularly is utilized in the outpatient setting to address various skin pathologies, including atopic dermatitis, psoriasis, pruritus, vitiligo, and mycosis fungoides.1,2 Phototherapy is broadly defined by the measured administration of nonionizing radiation within the UV range including wavelengths within the UVA (eg, psoralen sensitizer plus UVA-1) and UVB (eg, broadband UVB, narrowband UVB) spectrums.1,3 Generally, the mechanism of action is derived from effects on inflammatory components of cutaneous disorders and the induction of apoptosis, both precipitating numerous downstream events.4
From 2015 to 2018, there were more than 1.3 million outpatient phototherapy visits in the United States, with the most common procedural indications being dermatitis not otherwise specified, atopic dermatitis, and pruritus.5 From 2000 to 2015, the quantity of phototherapy services billed to Medicare trended upwards by an average of 5% per year, increasing from 334,670 in the year 2000 to 692,093 in 2015.6 Therefore, an illustration of associated costs would be beneficial. Additionally, because total cost and physician reimbursement fluctuate from year to year, studies demonstrating overall trends can inform both US policymakers and physicians. There is a paucity of research on geographical trends for procedural reimbursements in dermatology for phototherapy. Understanding geographic trends of reimbursement could duly serve to optimize dermatologist practice patterns involving access to viable and quality care for patients seeking treatment as well as draw health policymakers’ attention to striking adjustments in physician fees. Therefore, in this study we aimed to illustrate the most recent regional payment trends in phototherapy procedures for Medicare B patients.
We queried the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (MPFS) database (https://www.cms.gov/medicare/payment/fee-schedules/physician/lookup-tool) for the years 2010 to 2023 for Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes common to phototherapy procedures: actinotherapy (96900); photochemotherapy by Goeckerman treatment or using petrolatum and UVB (96910); photochemotherapy using psoralen plus UVA (96912); and photochemotherapy of severe dermatoses requiring a minimum of 4 hours of care under direct physician supervision (96913). Nonfacility prices for these procedures were analyzed. For 2010, due to midyear alterations to Medicare reimbursement (owed to bills HR 3962 and HR 4872), the mean price data of MPFS files 2010A and 2010B were used. All dollar values were converted to January 2023 US dollars using corresponding consumer price index inflation data. The Medicare Administrative Contractors were used to group state pricing information by region in accordance with established US Census Bureau subdivisions (https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/economic-census/guidance-geographies/levels.html). Weighted percentage change in reimbursement rate was calculated using physician (MD or DO) utilization (procedure volume) data available in the 2020 Physician and Other Practitioners Public Use File (https://data.cms.gov/provider-summary-by-type-of-service/medicare-physician-other-practitioners/medicare-physician-other-practitioners-by-provider-and-service). All descriptive statistics and visualization were generated using R software (v4.2.2)(R Development Core Team).
Table 1 provides physician utilization data and the corresponding number of Part B beneficiaries for phototherapy procedures in 2020. There were 65,045 services of actinotherapy provided to a total of 6855 unique Part B beneficiaries, 173,979 services of photochemotherapy by Goeckerman treatment or using petrolatum and UVB provided to 13,122 unique Part B beneficiaries, 2524 services of photochemotherapy using psoralen plus UVA provided to a total of 357 unique Part B beneficiaries, and 37 services of photochemotherapy of severe dermatoses requiring a minimum of 4 hours of care under direct physician supervision provided to a total of 27 unique Part B beneficiaries.
On average (unweighted), phototherapy reimbursement rates in the North increased by 0.68% between 2010 and 2023 (Table 2). After weighting for 2020 physician utilization, the average change in reimbursement rate was +19.37%. During this time period, CPT code 96910 reported the greatest adjusted increase in reimbursement (+31.45%)($98.12 to $128.98; compound annual growth rate [CAGR], +0.0213), and CPT code 96912 reported the greatest adjusted decrease in reimbursement (−12.76%)($126.09 to $109.97; CAGR, −0.0105). For CPT code 96900, the reported adjusted decrease in reimbursement was −11.68% ($30.21 to $26.68; CAGR, −0.0095), and for CPT code 96913, the reported adjusted decrease in reimbursement was −4.27% ($174.03 to $166.60; CAGR, −0.0034).
On average (unweighted), phototherapy reimbursement rates in the Midwest increased by 8.40% between 2010 and 2023 (Table 3). After weighting for 2020 physician utilization, the average change in reimbursement rate was +28.53%. During this time period, CPT code 96910 reported the greatest adjusted change in reimbursement (+41.48%)($80.42 to $113.78; CAGR, +0.0270), and CPT code 96912 reported the greatest adjusted decrease in reimbursement (−6.14%)($103.28 to $97.03; CAGR, −0.0049). For CPT code 96900, the reported adjusted decrease in reimbursement was −4.73% ($24.69 to $23.52; CAGR, −0.0037), and for CPT code 96913, the reported adjusted increase in reimbursement was +2.99% ($142.72 to $146.99; CAGR, +0.0023).
On average (unweighted), phototherapy reimbursement rates in the South decreased by 2.62% between 2010 and 2023 (Table 4). After weighting for 2020 physician utilization, the average change in reimbursement rate was +15.41%. During this time period, CPT code 96910 reported the greatest adjusted change in reimbursement (+27.26%)($90.40 to $115.04 USD; CAGR, +0.0187), and CPT code 96912 reported the greatest adjusted decrease in reimbursement (−15.50%)($116.08 to $98.09; CAGR, −0.0129). For CPT code 96900, the reported adjusted decrease in reimbursement was −15.06% ($28.02 to $23.80; CAGR, −0.0125), and for CPT code 96913, the reported adjusted decrease in reimbursement was −7.19% ($160.11 to $148.61; CAGR, −0.0057).
On average (unweighted), phototherapy reimbursement rates in the West increased by 27.53% between 2010 and 2023 (Table 5). After weighting for 2020 physician utilization, the average change in reimbursement rate was +51.16%. Reimbursement for all analyzed procedures increased in the western United States. During this time period, CPT code 96910 reported the greatest adjusted increase in reimbursement (+66.56%)($80.84 to $134.65; CAGR, +0.0400), and CPT code 96912 reported the lowest adjusted increase in reimbursement (+10.64%)($103.88 to $114.93; CAGR, +0.0078). For CPT code 96900, the reported adjusted increase in reimbursement was 11.54% ($24.88 to $27.75; CAGR, +0.0084), and for CPT code 96913, the reported adjusted increase in reimbursement was 21.38% ($143.39 to $174.04; CAGR, +0.0150).
In this study evaluating geographical payment trends for phototherapy from 2010 to 2023, we demonstrated regional inconsistency in mean inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement rates. We found that all phototherapy procedures had increased reimbursement in the western United States, whereas all other regions reported cuts in reimbursement rates for at least half of the analyzed procedures. After adjusting for procedure utilization by physicians, weighted mean reimbursement for phototherapy increased in all US regions.
In a cross-sectional study that explored trends in the geographic distribution of dermatologists from 2012 to 2017, dermatologists in the northeastern and western United States were more likely to be located in higher-income zip codes, whereas dermatologists in the southern United States were more likely to be located in lower-income zip codes,7 suggesting that payment rate changes are not concordant with cost of living. Additionally, Lauck and colleagues8 observed that 75% of the top 20 most common procedures performed by dermatologists had decreased reimbursement (mean change, −10.8%) from 2011 to 2021. Other studies on Medicare reimbursement trends over the last 2 decades have reported major decreases within other specialties, suggesting that declining Medicare reimbursements are not unique to dermatology.9,10 It is critical to monitor these developments, as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services emphasized health care policy changes aimed at increasing reimbursements for evaluation and management services with compensatory payment cuts in billing for procedural services.11
Mazmudar et al12 previously reported a mean reimbursement decrease of −6.6% for laser/phototherapy procedures between 2007 and 2021, but these data did not include the heavily utilized Goeckerman treatment. Changes in reimbursement pose major ramifications for dermatologists—for practice size, scope, and longevity—as rates influence changes in commercial insurance reimbursements.13 Medicare plays a major role in the US health care system as the second largest expenditure14; indeed, between 2000 and 2015, Part B billing volume for phototherapy procedures increased 5% annually. However, phototherapy remains inaccessible in many locations due to unequal regional distribution of phototherapy clinics.6 Moreover, home phototherapy units are not yet widely utilized because of safety and efficacy concerns, lack of physician oversight, and difficulty obtaining insurance coverage.15 Acknowledgment and consideration of these geographical trends may persuasively allow policymakers, hospitals, and physicians to facilitate cost-effective phototherapy reimbursements that ensure continued access to quality and sustainable dermatologic care in the United States that tailor to regional needs.
In sum, this analysis reveals regional trends in Part B physician reimbursement for phototherapy procedures, with all US regions reporting a mean increase in phototherapy reimbursement after adjusting for utilization, albeit to varying degrees. Mean reimbursement for photochemotherapy by Goeckerman treatment or using petrolatum and UVB increased most among phototherapy procedures. Mean reimbursement for both actinotherapy and photochemotherapy using psoralen plus UVA decreased in all regions except the western United States.
Limitations include the restriction to Part B MPFS and the reliance on single-year (2020) physician utilization data to compute weighted changes in average reimbursement across a multiyear range, effectively restricting sweeping conclusions. Still, this study puts forth actionable insights for dermatologists and policymakers alike to appreciate and consider.
- Rathod DG, Muneer H, Masood S. Phototherapy. StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; 2002.
- Branisteanu DE, Dirzu DS, Toader MP, et al. Phototherapy in dermatological maladies (Review). Exp Ther Med. 2022;23:259. doi:10.3892/etm.2022.11184
- Barros NM, Sbroglio LL, Buffara MO, et al. Phototherapy. An Bras Dermatol. 2021;96:397-407. doi:10.1016/j.abd.2021.03.001
- Vieyra-Garcia PA, Wolf P. A deep dive into UV-based phototherapy: mechanisms of action and emerging molecular targets in inflammation and cancer. Pharmacol Ther. 2021;222:107784. doi:10.1016/j.pharmthera.2020.107784
- Oulee A, Javadi SS, Martin A, et al. Phototherapy trends in dermatology 2015-2018. J Dermatolog Treat. 2022;33:2545-2546. doi:10.1080/09546634.2021.2019660
- Tan SY, Buzney E, Mostaghimi A. Trends in phototherapy utilization among Medicare beneficiaries in the United States, 2000 to 2015. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;79:672-679. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2018.03.018
- Benlagha I, Nguyen BM. Changes in dermatology practice characteristics in the United States from 2012 to 2017. JAAD Int. 2021;3:92-101. doi:10.1016/j.jdin.2021.03.005
- Lauck K, Nguyen QB, Hebert A. Trends in Medicare reimbursement within dermatology: 2011-2021. Skin. 2022;6:122-131. doi:10.25251/skin.6.2.5
- Smith JF, Moore ML, Pollock JR, et al. National and geographic trends in Medicare reimbursement rates for orthopedic shoulder and upper extremity surgery from 2000 to 2020. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2022;31:860-867. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2021.09.001
- Haglin JM, Eltorai AEM, Richter KR, et al. Medicare reimbursement for general surgery procedures: 2000 to 2018. Ann Surg. 2020;271:17-22. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000003289
- Fleishon HB. Evaluation and management coding initiative. J Am Coll Radiol. 2020;17:1539-1540. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2020.09.057
- Mazmudar RS, Sheth A, Tripathi R, et al. Inflation-adjusted trends in Medicare reimbursement for common dermatologic procedures, 2007-2021. JAMA Dermatol. 2021;157:1355-1358. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2021.3453
- Clemens J, Gottlieb JD. In the shadow of a giant: Medicare’s influence on private physician payments. J Polit Econ. 2017;125:1-39. doi:10.1086/689772
- Ya J, Ezaldein HH, Scott JF. Trends in Medicare utilization by dermatologists, 2012-2015. JAMA Dermatol. 2019;155:471-474. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2018.4212
- Rajpara AN, O’Neill JL, Nolan BV, et al. Review of home phototherapy. Dermatol Online J. 2010;16:2.
- Rathod DG, Muneer H, Masood S. Phototherapy. StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; 2002.
- Branisteanu DE, Dirzu DS, Toader MP, et al. Phototherapy in dermatological maladies (Review). Exp Ther Med. 2022;23:259. doi:10.3892/etm.2022.11184
- Barros NM, Sbroglio LL, Buffara MO, et al. Phototherapy. An Bras Dermatol. 2021;96:397-407. doi:10.1016/j.abd.2021.03.001
- Vieyra-Garcia PA, Wolf P. A deep dive into UV-based phototherapy: mechanisms of action and emerging molecular targets in inflammation and cancer. Pharmacol Ther. 2021;222:107784. doi:10.1016/j.pharmthera.2020.107784
- Oulee A, Javadi SS, Martin A, et al. Phototherapy trends in dermatology 2015-2018. J Dermatolog Treat. 2022;33:2545-2546. doi:10.1080/09546634.2021.2019660
- Tan SY, Buzney E, Mostaghimi A. Trends in phototherapy utilization among Medicare beneficiaries in the United States, 2000 to 2015. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;79:672-679. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2018.03.018
- Benlagha I, Nguyen BM. Changes in dermatology practice characteristics in the United States from 2012 to 2017. JAAD Int. 2021;3:92-101. doi:10.1016/j.jdin.2021.03.005
- Lauck K, Nguyen QB, Hebert A. Trends in Medicare reimbursement within dermatology: 2011-2021. Skin. 2022;6:122-131. doi:10.25251/skin.6.2.5
- Smith JF, Moore ML, Pollock JR, et al. National and geographic trends in Medicare reimbursement rates for orthopedic shoulder and upper extremity surgery from 2000 to 2020. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2022;31:860-867. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2021.09.001
- Haglin JM, Eltorai AEM, Richter KR, et al. Medicare reimbursement for general surgery procedures: 2000 to 2018. Ann Surg. 2020;271:17-22. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000003289
- Fleishon HB. Evaluation and management coding initiative. J Am Coll Radiol. 2020;17:1539-1540. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2020.09.057
- Mazmudar RS, Sheth A, Tripathi R, et al. Inflation-adjusted trends in Medicare reimbursement for common dermatologic procedures, 2007-2021. JAMA Dermatol. 2021;157:1355-1358. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2021.3453
- Clemens J, Gottlieb JD. In the shadow of a giant: Medicare’s influence on private physician payments. J Polit Econ. 2017;125:1-39. doi:10.1086/689772
- Ya J, Ezaldein HH, Scott JF. Trends in Medicare utilization by dermatologists, 2012-2015. JAMA Dermatol. 2019;155:471-474. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2018.4212
- Rajpara AN, O’Neill JL, Nolan BV, et al. Review of home phototherapy. Dermatol Online J. 2010;16:2.
<!--$RCSfile: InCopy_agile.xsl,v $ $Revision: 1.35 $-->
<!--$RCSfile: drupal.xsl,v $ $Revision: 1.7 $-->
<root generator="drupal.xsl" gversion="1.7"> <header> <fileName>Diaz</fileName> <TBEID>0C02F1C7.SIG</TBEID> <TBUniqueIdentifier>NJ_0C02F1C7</TBUniqueIdentifier> <newsOrJournal>Journal</newsOrJournal> <publisherName>Frontline Medical Communications Inc.</publisherName> <storyname>Diaz</storyname> <articleType>1</articleType> <TBLocation>Copyfitting-CT</TBLocation> <QCDate/> <firstPublished>20240201T115727</firstPublished> <LastPublished>20240201T115727</LastPublished> <pubStatus qcode="stat:"/> <embargoDate/> <killDate/> <CMSDate>20240201T115726</CMSDate> <articleSource/> <facebookInfo/> <meetingNumber/> <byline>Michael J. Diaz, BS; Jasmine T. Tran, BS; Alice Beneke, BS</byline> <bylineText>Michael J. Diaz, BS; Jasmine T. Tran, BS; Alice Beneke, BS; Brandon V. Tran, BS; Kevin T. Root, BS; Mahtab Forouzandeh, MD, MPH; Shari R. Lipner, MD, PhD</bylineText> <bylineFull>Michael J. Diaz, BS; Jasmine T. Tran, BS; Alice Beneke, BS</bylineFull> <bylineTitleText/> <USOrGlobal/> <wireDocType/> <newsDocType/> <journalDocType/> <linkLabel/> <pageRange>E39-E43</pageRange> <citation/> <quizID/> <indexIssueDate/> <itemClass qcode="ninat:text"/> <provider qcode="provider:"> <name/> <rightsInfo> <copyrightHolder> <name/> </copyrightHolder> <copyrightNotice/> </rightsInfo> </provider> <abstract/> <metaDescription>To the Editor:Phototherapy regularly is utilized in the outpatient setting to address various skin pathologies, including atopic dermatitis, psoriasis, pruritus</metaDescription> <articlePDF>300155</articlePDF> <teaserImage/> <title>A Cross-sectional Analysis of Regional Trends in Medicare Reimbursement for Phototherapy Services From 2010 to 2023</title> <deck/> <disclaimer/> <AuthorList/> <articleURL/> <doi/> <pubMedID/> <publishXMLStatus/> <publishXMLVersion>1</publishXMLVersion> <useEISSN>0</useEISSN> <urgency/> <pubPubdateYear>2024</pubPubdateYear> <pubPubdateMonth>January</pubPubdateMonth> <pubPubdateDay/> <pubVolume>113</pubVolume> <pubNumber>1</pubNumber> <wireChannels/> <primaryCMSID/> <CMSIDs> <CMSID>2163</CMSID> </CMSIDs> <keywords> <keyword>psoriasis</keyword> <keyword> phototherapy</keyword> <keyword> medicare</keyword> </keywords> <seeAlsos/> <publications_g> <publicationData> <publicationCode>CT</publicationCode> <pubIssueName>January 2024</pubIssueName> <pubArticleType>Online Exclusive | 2163</pubArticleType> <pubTopics/> <pubCategories/> <pubSections/> <journalTitle>Cutis</journalTitle> <journalFullTitle>Cutis</journalFullTitle> <copyrightStatement>Copyright 2015 Frontline Medical Communications Inc., Parsippany, NJ, USA. All rights reserved.</copyrightStatement> </publicationData> </publications_g> <publications> <term canonical="true">12</term> </publications> <sections> <term canonical="true">104</term> </sections> <topics> <term canonical="true">281</term> </topics> <links> <link> <itemClass qcode="ninat:composite"/> <altRep contenttype="application/pdf">images/180026c5.pdf</altRep> <description role="drol:caption"/> <description role="drol:credit"/> </link> </links> </header> <itemSet> <newsItem> <itemMeta> <itemRole>Main</itemRole> <itemClass>text</itemClass> <title>A Cross-sectional Analysis of Regional Trends in Medicare Reimbursement for Phototherapy Services From 2010 to 2023</title> <deck/> </itemMeta> <itemContent> <p>To the Editor:<br/><br/>Phototherapy regularly is utilized in the outpatient setting to address various skin pathologies, including atopic dermatitis, psoriasis, pruritus, vitiligo, and mycosis fungoides.<sup>1,2</sup> Phototherapy is broadly defined by the measured administration of nonionizing radiation within the UV range including wavelengths within the UVA (eg, psoralen sensitizer plus UVA-1) and UVB (eg, broadband UVB, narrowband UVB) spectrums.<sup>1,3</sup> Generally, the mechanism of action is derived from effects on inflammatory components of cutaneous disorders and the induction of apoptosis, both precipitating numerous downstream events.<sup>4</sup> </p> <p>From 2015 to 2018, there were more than 1.3 million outpatient phototherapy visits in the United States, with the most common procedural indications being dermatitis not otherwise specified, atopic dermatitis, and pruritus.<sup>5</sup> From 2000 to 2015, the quantity of phototherapy services billed to Medicare trended upwards by an average of 5% per year, increasing from 334,670 in the year 2000 to 692,093 in 2015.<sup>6</sup> Therefore, an illustration of associated costs would be beneficial. Additionally, because total cost and physician reimbursement fluctuate from year to year, studies demonstrating overall trends can inform both US policymakers and physicians. There is a paucity of research on geographical trends for procedural reimbursements in dermatology for phototherapy. Understanding geographic trends of reimbursement could duly serve to optimize dermatologist practice patterns involving access to viable and quality care for patients seeking treatment as well as draw health policymakers’ attention to striking adjustments in physician fees. Therefore, in this study we aimed to illustrate the most recent regional payment trends in phototherapy procedures for Medicare B patients.<br/><br/>We queried the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (MPFS) database (https://www.cms.gov/medicare/payment/fee-schedules/physician/lookup-tool) for the years 2010 to 2023 for <i>Current Procedural Terminology</i> (<i>CPT</i>) codes common to phototherapy procedures: actinotherapy (96900); photochemotherapy by Goeckerman treatment or using petrolatum and UVB (96910); photochemotherapy using psoralen plus UVA (96912); and photochemotherapy of severe dermatoses requiring a minimum of 4 hours of care under direct physician supervision (96913). Nonfacility prices for these procedures were analyzed. For 2010, due to midyear alterations to Medicare reimbursement (owed to bills HR 3962 and HR 4872), the mean price data of MPFS files 2010A and 2010B were used. All dollar values were converted to January 2023 US dollars using corresponding consumer price index inflation data. The Medicare Administrative Contractors were used to group state pricing information by region in accordance with established US Census Bureau subdivisions (https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/economic-census/guidance-geographies/levels.html). Weighted percentage change in reimbursement rate was calculated using physician (MD or DO) utilization (procedure volume) data available in the 2020 Physician and Other Practitioners Public Use File (https://data.cms.gov/provider-summary-by-type-of-service/medicare-physician-other-practitioners/medicare-physician-other-practitioners-by-provider-and-service). All descriptive statistics and visualization were generated using R software (v4.2.2)(R Development Core Team).<br/><br/>Table 1 provides physician utilization data and the corresponding number of Part B beneficiaries for phototherapy procedures in 2020. There were 65,045 services of actinotherapy provided to a total of 6855 unique Part B beneficiaries, 173,979 services of photochemotherapy by Goeckerman treatment or using petrolatum and UVB provided to 13,122 unique Part B beneficiaries, 2524 services of photochemotherapy using psoralen plus UVA provided to a total of 357 unique Part B beneficiaries, and 37 services of photochemotherapy of severe dermatoses requiring a minimum of 4 hours of care under direct physician supervision provided to a total of 27 unique Part B beneficiaries.<br/><br/><hl name="3"/>On average (unweighted), phototherapy reimbursement rates in the North increased by 0.68% between 2010 and 2023 (Table 2). After weighting for 2020 physician utilization, the average change in reimbursement rate was <span class="body">+</span>19.37%. During this time period, <i>CPT</i> code 96910 reported the greatest adjusted increase in reimbursement (<span class="body">+</span>31.45%)($98.12 to $128.98; compound annual growth rate [CAGR], <span class="body">+</span>0.0213), and <i>CPT</i> code 96912 reported the greatest adjusted decrease in reimbursement (<span class="body">−</span>12.76%)($126.09 to $109.97; CAGR, <span class="body">−</span>0.0105). For <i>CPT</i> code 96900, the reported adjusted decrease in reimbursement was <span class="body">−</span>11.68% ($30.21 to $26.68; CAGR, <span class="body">−</span>0.0095), and for <i>CPT</i> code 96913, the reported adjusted decrease in reimbursement was <span class="body">−</span>4.27% ($174.03 to $166.60; CAGR, <span class="body">−</span>0.0034).<br/><br/>On average (unweighted), phototherapy reimbursement rates in the Midwest increased by 8.40% between 2010 and 2023 (Table 3). After weighting for 2020 physician utilization, the average change in reimbursement rate was <span class="body">+</span>28.53%. During this time period, <i>CPT</i> code 96910 reported the greatest adjusted change in reimbursement (<span class="body">+</span>41.48%)($80.42 to $113.78; CAGR, <span class="body">+</span>0.0270), and <i>CPT</i> code 96912 reported the greatest adjusted decrease in reimbursement (<span class="body">−</span>6.14%)($103.28 to $97.03; CAGR, <span class="body">−</span>0.0049). For <i>CPT</i> code 96900, the reported adjusted decrease in reimbursement was <span class="body">−</span>4.73% ($24.69 to $23.52; CAGR, <span class="body">−</span>0.0037), and for <i>CPT</i> code 96913, the reported adjusted increase in reimbursement was <span class="body">+</span>2.99% ($142.72 to $146.99; CAGR, <span class="body">+</span>0.0023).<br/><br/>On average (unweighted), phototherapy reimbursement rates in the South decreased by 2.62% between 2010 and 2023 (Table 4). After weighting for 2020 physician utilization, the average change in reimbursement rate was <span class="body">+</span>15.41%. During this time period, <i>CPT</i> code 96910 reported the greatest adjusted change in reimbursement (<span class="body">+</span>27.26%)($90.40 to $115.04 USD; CAGR, <span class="body">+</span>0.0187), and <i>CPT</i> code 96912 reported the greatest adjusted decrease in reimbursement (<span class="body">−</span>15.50%)($116.08 to $98.09; CAGR, <span class="body">−</span>0.0129). For <i>CPT</i> code 96900, the reported adjusted decrease in reimbursement was <span class="body">−</span>15.06% ($28.02 to $23.80; CAGR, <span class="body">−</span>0.0125), and for <i>CPT</i> code 96913, the reported adjusted decrease in reimbursement was <span class="body">−</span>7.19% ($160.11 to $148.61; CAGR, <span class="body">−</span>0.0057).<br/><br/>On average (unweighted), phototherapy reimbursement rates in the West increased by 27.53% between 2010 and 2023 (Table 5). After weighting for 2020 physician utilization, the average change in reimbursement rate was <span class="body">+</span>51.16%. Reimbursement for all analyzed procedures increased in the western United States. During this time period, <i>CPT</i> code 96910 reported the greatest adjusted increase in reimbursement (<span class="body">+</span>66.56%)($80.84 to $134.65; CAGR, <span class="body">+</span>0.0400), and <i>CPT</i> code 96912 reported the lowest adjusted increase in reimbursement (<span class="body">+</span>10.64%)($103.88 to $114.93; CAGR, <span class="body">+</span>0.0078). For <i>CPT</i> code 96900, the reported adjusted increase in reimbursement was 11.54% ($24.88 to $27.75; CAGR, <span class="body">+</span>0.0084), and for <i>CPT</i> code 96913, the reported adjusted increase in reimbursement was 21.38% ($143.39 to $174.04; CAGR, <span class="body">+</span>0.0150).<br/><br/>In this study evaluating geographical payment trends for phototherapy from 2010 to 2023, we demonstrated regional inconsistency in mean inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement rates. We found that all phototherapy procedures had increased reimbursement in the western United States, whereas all other regions reported cuts in reimbursement rates for at least half of the analyzed procedures. After adjusting for procedure utilization by physicians, weighted mean reimbursement for phototherapy increased in all US regions.<br/><br/>In a cross-sectional study that explored trends in the geographic distribution of dermatologists from 2012 to 2017, dermatologists in the northeastern and western United States were more likely to be located in higher-income zip codes, whereas dermatologists in the southern United States were more likely to be located in lower-income zip codes,<sup>7</sup> suggesting that payment rate changes are not concordant with cost of living. Additionally, Lauck and colleagues<sup>8</sup> observed that 75% of the top 20 most common procedures performed by dermatologists had decreased reimbursement (mean change, <span class="body">−</span>10.8%) from 2011 to 2021. Other studies on Medicare reimbursement trends over the last 2 decades have reported major decreases within other specialties, suggesting that declining Medicare reimbursements are not unique to dermatology.<sup>9,10</sup> It is critical to monitor these developments, as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services emphasized health care policy changes aimed at increasing reimbursements for evaluation and management services with compensatory payment cuts in billing for procedural services.<sup>11<br/><br/></sup>Mazmudar et al<sup>12</sup> previously reported a mean reimbursement decrease of <span class="body">−</span>6.6% for laser/phototherapy procedures between 2007 and 2021, but these data did not include the heavily utilized Goeckerman treatment. Changes in reimbursement pose major ramifications for dermatologists—for practice size, scope, and longevity—as rates influence changes in commercial insurance reimbursements.<sup>13</sup> Medicare plays a major role in the US health care system as the second largest expenditure<sup>14</sup>; indeed, between 2000 and 2015, Part B billing volume for phototherapy procedures increased 5% annually. However, phototherapy remains inaccessible in many locations due to unequal regional distribution of phototherapy clinics.<sup>6</sup> Moreover, home phototherapy units are not yet widely utilized because of safety and efficacy concerns, lack of physician oversight, and difficulty obtaining insurance coverage.<sup>15</sup> Acknowledgment and consideration of these geographical trends may persuasively allow policymakers, hospitals, and physicians to facilitate cost-effective phototherapy reimbursements that ensure continued access to quality and sustainable dermatologic care in the United States that tailor to regional needs.<br/><br/>In sum, this analysis reveals regional trends in Part B physician reimbursement for phototherapy procedures, with all US regions reporting a mean increase in phototherapy reimbursement after adjusting for utilization, albeit to varying degrees. Mean reimbursement for photochemotherapy by Goeckerman treatment or using petrolatum and UVB increased most among phototherapy procedures. Mean reimbursement for both actinotherapy and photochemotherapy using psoralen plus UVA decreased in all regions except the western United States.<br/><br/>Limitations include the restriction to Part B MPFS and the reliance on single-year (2020) physician utilization data to compute weighted changes in average reimbursement across a multiyear range, effectively restricting sweeping conclusions. Still, this study puts forth actionable insights for dermatologists and policymakers alike to appreciate and consider.</p> <h2>References</h2> <p class="reference"> 1. Rathod DG, Muneer H, Masood S. Phototherapy. <i>StatPearls</i>. StatPearls Publishing; 2002.<br/><br/> 2. Branisteanu DE, Dirzu DS, Toader MP, et al. Phototherapy in dermatological maladies (Review). <i>Exp Ther Med</i>. 2022;23:259. doi:10.3892/etm.2022.11184<br/><br/> 3. Barros NM, Sbroglio LL, Buffara MO, et al. Phototherapy. <i>An Bras Dermatol</i>. 2021;96:397-407. doi:10.1016/j.abd.2021.03.001<br/><br/> 4. Vieyra-Garcia PA, Wolf P. A deep dive into UV-based phototherapy: mechanisms of action and emerging molecular targets in inflammation and cancer. <i>Pharmacol Ther</i>. 2021;222:107784. doi:10.1016/j.pharmthera.2020.107784</p> <p class="reference"> 5. Oulee A, Javadi SS, Martin A, et al. Phototherapy trends in dermatology 2015-2018. <i>J Dermatolog Treat</i>. 2022;33:2545-2546. doi:10.1080/09546634.2021.2019660<br/><br/> 6. Tan SY, Buzney E, Mostaghimi A. Trends in phototherapy utilization among Medicare beneficiaries in the United States, 2000 to 2015. <i>J Am Acad Dermatol</i>. 2018;79:672-679. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2018.03.018<br/><br/> 7. Benlagha I, Nguyen BM. Changes in dermatology practice characteristics in the United States from 2012 to 2017. <i>JAAD Int</i>. 2021;3:92-101. doi:10.1016/j.jdin.2021.03.005<br/><br/> 8. Lauck K, Nguyen QB, Hebert A. Trends in Medicare reimbursement within dermatology: 2011-2021. <i>Skin</i>. 2022;6:122-131. doi:10.25251/skin.6.2.5<br/><br/> 9. Smith JF, Moore ML, Pollock JR, et al. National and geographic trends in Medicare reimbursement rates for orthopedic shoulder and upper extremity surgery from 2000 to 2020. <i>J Shoulder Elbow Surg</i>. 2022;31:860-867. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2021.09.001<br/><br/>10. Haglin JM, Eltorai AEM, Richter KR, et al. Medicare reimbursement for general surgery procedures: 2000 to 2018. <i>Ann Surg</i>. 2020;271:17-22. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000003289<br/><br/>11. Fleishon HB. Evaluation and management coding initiative. <i>J Am Coll Radiol</i>. 2020;17:1539-1540. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2020.09.057<br/><br/>12. Mazmudar RS, Sheth A, Tripathi R, et al. Inflation-adjusted trends in Medicare reimbursement for common dermatologic procedures, 2007-2021. <i>JAMA Dermatol</i>. 2021;157:1355-1358. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2021.3453<br/><br/>13. Clemens J, Gottlieb JD. In the shadow of a giant: Medicare’s influence on private physician payments. <i>J Polit Econ</i>. 2017;125:1-39. doi:10.1086/689772<br/><br/>14. Ya J, Ezaldein HH, Scott JF. Trends in Medicare utilization by dermatologists, 2012-2015. <i>JAMA Dermatol</i>. 2019;155:471-474. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2018.4212<br/><br/>15. Rajpara AN, O’Neill JL, Nolan BV, et al. Review of home phototherapy. <i>Dermatol</i> <i>Online</i> <i>J</i>. 2010;16:2.<hl name="4"/> </p> </itemContent> </newsItem> <newsItem> <itemMeta> <itemRole>bio</itemRole> <itemClass>text</itemClass> <title/> <deck/> </itemMeta> <itemContent> <p class="disclosure">Michael J. Diaz, Alice Beneke, and Kevin T. Root are from the College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville. Jasmine T. Tran is from the School of Medicine, Indiana University, Indianapolis. Brandon V. Tran is from the College of Arts & Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa. Dr. Forouzandeh is from the Department of Dermatology, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville. Dr. Lipner is from the Department of Dermatology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York.</p> <p class="disclosure">Michael J. Diaz, Jasmine T. Tran, Alice Beneke, Brandon V. Trans, Kevin T. Root, and Dr. Forouzandeh report no conflict of interest. Dr. Lipner has served as a consultant for BelleTorus Corporation, Hoth Therapeutics, Moberg Pharma, and Ortho Dermatologics.<br/><br/>Correspondence: Michael J. Diaz, BS, College of Medicine, University of Florida, 1104 Newell Dr, Gainesville, FL 32601 (michaeldiaz@ufl.edu).<br/><br/>doi:10.12788/cutis.0954</p> </itemContent> </newsItem> <newsItem> <itemMeta> <itemRole>in</itemRole> <itemClass>text</itemClass> <title/> <deck/> </itemMeta> <itemContent> <p class="insidehead">Practice <strong>Points</strong></p> <ul class="insidebody"> <li>After weighting for procedure utilization, mean reimbursement for phototherapy increased across all US regions from 2010 to 2023 (mean change, 11<span class="body">+</span>28.62%), yet with marked regional diversity.</li> <li>The southern United States reported the least growth in weighted mean reimbursement (11<span class="body">+</span>15.41%), and the western United States reported the greatest growth in weighted mean reimbursement (11<span class="body">+</span>51.16%). </li> <li>Region- and procedure-specific payment changes are especially valuable to dermatologists and policymakers alike, potentially reinvigorating payment reform discussions.</li> </ul> </itemContent> </newsItem> </itemSet></root>
Practice Points
- After weighting for procedure utilization, mean reimbursement for phototherapy increased across all US regions from 2010 to 2023 (mean change, +28.62%), yet with marked regional diversity.
- The southern United States reported the least growth in weighted mean reimbursement (+15.41%), and the western United States reported the greatest growth in weighted mean reimbursement (+51.16%).
- Region- and procedure-specific payment changes are especially valuable to dermatologists and policymakers alike, potentially reinvigorating payment reform discussions.