147 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34736273)
1. Reimbursement for Female-Specific Compared With Male-Specific Procedures Over Time.
Polan RM; Barber EL
Obstet Gynecol; 2021 Dec; 138(6):878-883. PubMed ID: 34736273
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Correlation between Relative Value Units and Operative Time for Flap-Based Reconstruction Procedures.
Dibbs RP; Skochdopole A; Reul RM; Beh HZ; Ferry AM; Conlon CJ; O'Neill R; Reece E; Winocour S
Plast Reconstr Surg; 2023 Feb; 151(2):299e-307e. PubMed ID: 36696331
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Discrepancies Created by Surgeon Self-Reported Operative Time and the Effects on Procedural Relative Value Units and Reimbursement.
Uppal S; Rice LW; Spencer RJ
Obstet Gynecol; 2021 Aug; 138(2):182-188. PubMed ID: 34237766
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Association of Neurosurgical Work Relative Value Units with Objective Markers of Operative Complexity.
Chiu RG; Siddiqui N; Nunna RS; Patel S; Rosinski CL; Chaker AN; Hobbs JG; Mehta AI
World Neurosurg; 2021 Feb; 146():e194-e204. PubMed ID: 33091644
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of 2015 Medicare relative value units for gender-specific procedures: Gynecologic and gynecologic-oncologic versus urologic CPT coding. Has time healed gender-worth?
Benoit MF; Ma JF; Upperman BA
Gynecol Oncol; 2017 Feb; 144(2):336-342. PubMed ID: 28024653
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. What provides a better value for your time? The use of relative value units to compare posterior segmental instrumentation of vertebral segments.
Orr RD; Sodhi N; Dalton SE; Khlopas A; Sultan AA; Chughtai M; Newman JM; Savage J; Mroz TE; Mont MA
Spine J; 2018 Oct; 18(10):1727-1732. PubMed ID: 29410308
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of 1997 Medicare relative value units for gender-specific procedures: is Adam still worth more than Eve?
Goff BA; Muntz HG; Cain JM
Gynecol Oncol; 1997 Aug; 66(2):313-9. PubMed ID: 9264582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Barriers to Revision Total Hip Service Lines: A Surgeon's Perspective Through a Deterministic Financial Model.
Feng JE; Anoushiravani AA; Schoof LH; Gabor JA; Padilla J; Slover J; Schwarzkopf R
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2020 Jul; 478(7):1657-1666. PubMed ID: 32574471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Are We Appropriately Compensated by Relative Value Units for Primary vs Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty?
Sodhi N; Piuzzi NS; Khlopas A; Newman JM; Kryzak TJ; Stearns KL; Mont MA
J Arthroplasty; 2018 Feb; 33(2):340-344. PubMed ID: 28993077
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparison of a Posterior versus Anterior Approach for Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery Based on Relative Value Units.
Sodhi N; Patel Y; Berger RJ; Newman JM; Anis HK; Ehiorobo JO; Khlopas A; Desai R; Hollern DA; Schwartz JM; Paulino CB; Mont MA
Surg Technol Int; 2019 Nov; 35():363-368. PubMed ID: 31373381
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Association of Work Measures and Specialty With Assigned Work Relative Value Units Among Surgeons.
Childers CP; Dworsky JQ; Russell MM; Maggard-Gibbons M
JAMA Surg; 2019 Oct; 154(10):915-921. PubMed ID: 31314063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A Comparison of Relative Value Units in Primary Versus Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty.
Peterson J; Sodhi N; Khlopas A; Piuzzi NS; Newman JM; Sultan AA; Stearns KL; Mont MA
J Arthroplasty; 2018 Jul; 33(7S):S39-S42. PubMed ID: 29276122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Correlation of Relative Value Units With Surgical Complexity and Physician Workload in Urology.
Gan ZS; Wood CM; Hayon S; Deal A; Smith AB; Tan HJ; Pruthi RS
Urology; 2020 May; 139():71-77. PubMed ID: 32084413
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison between indicators for the measurement of radiology activity volumes (Italy-USA).
Cristofaro M; Bibbolino C; Lauria FN; Petrecchia A; Squarcione S; David V
Radiol Med; 2004 Oct; 108(4):426-38. PubMed ID: 15525896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A Comparison of Relative Value Units in Primary versus Revision Total Ankle Arthroplasty.
Sodhi N; Yao B; Newman JM; Jawad M; Khlopas A; Sultan AA; Lamaj S; Beyer GA; Wilhelm AB; Mont MA
Surg Technol Int; 2017 Dec; 31():322-326. PubMed ID: 29316589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Productivity of radiologists: estimates based on analysis of relative value units.
Conoley PM; Vernon SW
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1991 Dec; 157(6):1337-40. PubMed ID: 1950885
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Not all primary total hip arthroplasties are equal-so is there a difference in reimbursement?
Sodhi N; Dalton SE; Garbarino LJ; Gold PA; Piuzzi NS; Newman JM; Khlopas A; Sultan AA; Chughtai M; Mont MA
Ann Transl Med; 2019 Feb; 7(4):74. PubMed ID: 30963069
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Vascular Surgeons Are Not Adequately Valued by Traditional Productivity Metrics.
Fang Z; Judelson D; Simons J; Steppacher R; Arous E; Sideman M; Schanzer A; Aiello FA
Ann Vasc Surg; 2021 May; 73():446-453. PubMed ID: 33359694
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Trends in reimbursement for primary and revision total elbow arthroplasty.
Sugarman BS; Belay ES; Saltzman EB; Richard MJ; Ruch DS; Anakwenze OA; Klifto CS
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2021 Jan; 30(1):146-150. PubMed ID: 32610075
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. National Undervaluation of Cleft Surgical Services: Evidence from a Comparative Analysis of 50,450 Cases.
Rochlin DH; Chaya BF; Flores RL
Plast Reconstr Surg; 2023 Mar; 151(3):603-610. PubMed ID: 36730532
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
