Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

The Influence of Physician Payments on the Method of Breast Reconstruction

A National Claims Analysis

Mullens, Cody L., B.S.; Hernandez, J. Andres, B.S.; Serletti, Joseph M., M.D.

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery: June 2019 - Volume 143 - Issue 6 - p 1311e–1312e
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000005659
Letters
Free

West Virginia University School of Medicine, Morgantown, W.Va., Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa.

Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa.

Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa.

Correspondence to Mr. Hernandez, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, 3400 Civic Center Boulevard, Philadelphia, Pa. 19104, jorge.hernandez@pennmedicine.upenn.edu

Back to Top | Article Outline

Sir:

We are pleased to see the article by Sheckter et al.,1 regarding physician payments and their potential influence on breast reconstruction, added to the literature. The authors should be commended for their application of rigorous study design, bootstrapping models, financial modeling, and geographic mapping to breast reconstruction in order to better understand practice patterns. However, the conclusions made in this study are not fully substantiated due to consideration of limitations, which may mislead readers of this article.

The authors discuss the “preference sensitive” nature of breast reconstruction, meaning that the modality of reconstruction utilized is decided based on physician and patient preferences. However, evidence suggests that patient preferences in breast reconstruction are highly influenced by physician preferences.2

Microsurgery-based breast reconstruction typically requires additional training and experience in order to achieve acceptable outcomes. Many plastic surgeons who lack training in reconstructive microsurgery do not include microsurgery-based breast reconstruction as part of their practice’s armamentarium. Moreover, microsurgery is a resource-intensive endeavor, which we should not assume can be supported by all institutions. In addition, the conclusions drawn by the authors surrounding the probability of reconstructive method based on per-procedure payment changes is potentially misleading. While extensive statistical methods were performed by the authors, the nature of their data (population-based) should prevent them from making claims surrounding the impact of payment structures on a per-surgeon basis. The unknown impact of significant payment increase on hospital infrastructure is a potential confounder to their claim that payment increase is required to switch from implant-based to flap-based reconstruction. Payer reimbursement rates are known to drive hospital infrastructural change, which has led to an increase in support for subspecialty surgical procedures over time.3

While reimbursement rates may serve as part of the driving force behind shifts in reconstructive method, the three aforementioned points are undoubtedly also part of the preference-sensitive paradigm. To appreciate the key takeaways of this thoughtful study, we believe it is important for other readers to also understand the factors outlined in this letter, which could limit conclusions drawn by the authors.

Back to Top | Article Outline

DISCLOSURE

Dr. Serletti is a stockholder in Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, and Merck. The senior author (J.M.S.) has received payment in the last 18 months for consultation to Axogen. The remaining authors have no financial conflicts to disclose.

Cody L. Mullens, B.S.

West Virginia University School of Medicine

Morgantown, W.Va.

Perelman School of Medicine

University of Pennsylvania

Philadelphia, Pa.

J. Andres Hernandez, B.S.

Perelman School of Medicine

University of Pennsylvania

Philadelphia, Pa.

Joseph M. Serletti, M.D.

Division of Plastic Surgery

Department of Surgery

Perelman School of Medicine

University of Pennsylvania

Philadelphia, Pa.

Back to Top | Article Outline

REFERENCES

1. Sheckter CC, Panchal HJ, Razdan SN, et al. The influence of physician payments on the method of breast reconstruction: A national claims analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;142:434e–442e.
2. Hasak JM, Myckatyn TM, Grabinski VF, Philpott SE, Parikh RP, Politi MC. Stakeholders’ perspectives on postmastectomy breast reconstruction: Recognizing ways to improve shared decision making. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2017;5:e1569.
3. Field RI. Mother of Invention: How the Government Created “Free-Market” Health Care. 2013.Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
Back to Top | Article Outline

GUIDELINES

Letters to the Editor, discussing material recently published in the Journal, are welcome. They will have the best chance of acceptance if they are received within 8 weeks of an article’s publication. Letters to the Editor may be published with a response from the authors of the article being discussed. Discussions beyond the initial letter and response will not be published. Letters submitted pertaining to published Discussions of articles will not be printed. Letters to the Editor are not usually peer reviewed, but the Journal may invite replies from the authors of the original publication. All Letters are published at the discretion of the Editor.

Letters submitted should pose a specific question that clarifies a point that either was not made in the article or was unclear, and therefore a response from the corresponding author of the article is requested.

Authors will be listed in the order in which they appear in the submission. Letters should be submitted electronically via PRS’ enkwell, at www.editorialmanager.com/prs/.

We reserve the right to edit Letters to meet requirements of space and format. Any financial interests relevant to the content of the correspondence must be disclosed. Submission of a Letter constitutes permission for the American Society of Plastic Surgeons and its licensees and asignees to publish it in the Journal and in any other form or medium.

The views, opinions, and conclusions expressed in the Letters to the Editor represent the personal opinions of the individual writers and not those of the publisher, the Editorial Board, or the sponsors of the Journal. Any stated views, opinions, and conclusions do not reflect the policy of any of the sponsoring organizations or of the institutions with which the writer is affiliated, and the publisher, the Editorial Board, and the sponsoring organizations assume no responsibility for the content of such correspondence.

The Journal requests that individuals submit no more than five (5) letters to Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery in a calendar year.

©2019American Society of Plastic Surgeons