{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.054189663823381834, 'fraction_numerical': 0.05920722528850978, 'mean_word_length': 5.350318471337579, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 3, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Medicare Utilization and Reimbursement Variation Between Rural and Urban Otolaryngologists.

OBJECTIVE
To compare billing practices, reimbursement rates, and patient populations of otolaryngology (ORL) physicians practicing in rural and urban settings.


STUDY DESIGN
Retrospective cross-sectional study.


SETTING
Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data: Physician and Other Supplier Data.


METHODS
Medicare-allowed payments, number of services, and number of patients were gathered along with patient population comorbidity statistics, including average hierarchical condition category risk scores.


RESULTS
In 2019, 92% of the overall total 8959 ORL physicians practiced in an urban setting. These 8243 urban ORL physicians, on average, billed for 51 (interquartile range [IQR], 31-67) unique Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes, cared for 393 (IQR, 172-535) Medicare patients, performed 1761 (IQR, 502-2070) services, and collected $139,957 (IQR, $55,527-$178,479) per provider. In contrast, the 704 rural ORL physicians, on average, billed for a greater number of unique HCPCS codes (59; IQR, 37-77; P < .001), treated more Medicare patients (445; IQR, 242-614; P < .001), and performed more services (2330; IQR, 694-2748; P < .001) but collected about the same per provider ($141,035; IQR, $56,555-$172,864; P = .426). Older age was associated with rural practice (P = .027). Among both urban and rural ORL physicians, the variety and complexity of procedures and patient comorbidity profiles were comparable.


CONCLUSION
Most ORL physicians practice in large urban settings, a finding potentially related to financial sustainability and career opportunity. With an already small workforce, the aging rural ORL physician population is an identifiable weak point in the otolaryngology specialty that must be addressed with geo-specific recruitment campaigns, rural work incentivization, and the development of career advancement opportunities in rural areas.