In June, Congress gave physicians relief from the scheduled 21 percent Medicare pay cut, but only until the end of November. The payment patch, which briefly increases reimbursement by 2.2 percent, leaves doctors in limbo.

In June, Congress gave physicians relief from the scheduled 21 percent Medicare pay cut, but only until the end of November. The payment patch, which briefly increases reimbursement by 2.2 percent, leaves doctors in limbo.
When describing to the curious the benefits of opting out of both Medicare and private insurance, Gerard J. Gianoli, MD, president of The Ear and Balance Institute in Baton Rouge, La., often recalls one particular example: During one 90-day global period about five years ago, after an eight-hour resection of a skull-based glomus tumor, post-operative ICU care and several days of inpatient care and the usual post-operative office visits, he received a total reimbursement of $500.
In the wake of this year’s landmark health care reform legislation, one of the most hotly debated topics comes courtesy of the Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care, as politicians, analysts, researchers and physicians grapple over how to resolve the contentious issue of geographical disparities in health care spending.
A physician who was recently offered a lucrative position with an otolaryngology practice in his community asked me to review his current employment agreement to determine if it contained any prohibitions against accepting the job. His previous employment contract contained a noncompetition clause that, justifiably, caused him and his prospective employer some concern. As it turned out, in his case, and in many others, the noncompetition clause was not as restrictive as it appeared at first glance. The provision was penetrable and my client joined the new practice with a clear conscience that he was not in violation of his previous contract.
With the availability of noninvasive procedures that use injectable fillers to do the work surgery once monopolized, more people than ever before are seeking the elixir of youth that comes now at the end of a needle rather than a knife.
Otolaryngologists are likely to see some changes in the way informed consent is handled at the hospitals where they perform surgery. Recent changes from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), along with Joint Commission rules, have prompted many hospitals and health systems to get more involved in what previously fell firmly in the physician’s purview.
Hayes Wanamaker, MD, an otolaryngologist in Syracuse, N.Y., refers to the recovery audit process of insurance carriers as the proverbial camel’s nose under the tent.
When Rahul Shah, MD, then a pediatric otolaryngologist at Children’s Hospital in Boston, and several colleagues first undertook a survey of otolaryngologists’ reactions to adverse events in 2004, they provided a blank form for respondents to write about what had happened. In the more than 200 responses they received, Dr. Shah and his colleagues read an outpouring of emotion.
By now, you’re probably well versed in the clinical aspects of the health reform bill signed by President Obama in March. But what you may not know is that the bill includes a section that could benefit otolaryngologists and other physicians in their role as employers.
Dr. Roberts used numbers to illustrate his point during a presentation at the Annual Meeting of the American Broncho-Esophagological Association, part of the Combined Otolaryngological Spring Meetings held here April 28-May 2.