Abstract
Introduction Tobacco cessation remains a critical challenge in healthcare, with evidence-based interventions often under-utilized due to misaligned economic incentives and inadequate training. This study aims to quantify the economic impact of missed billing opportunities for tobacco cessation in a healthcare system, thereby assessing potential revenue loss and evaluating the effectiveness of systems-based approaches in enhancing tobacco cessation efforts.
Methods A retrospective cohort study utilized aggregated de-identified patient health data from an 8-hospital regional health system across Pennsylvania and Maryland, from 1/1/21 to 12/31/23. The analysis focused on primary care encounters eligible for tobacco cessation counseling (CPT codes 99406 or 99407), with potential revenue calculated based on the Medicare reimbursement rate.
Results Over three years, and 507,656 office visits, only 1,557 (0.3%) of encounters with persons using tobacco were billed for cessation services. The estimated total potential revenue gained if each person who was identified as using tobacco was billed consistently for tobacco cessation counseling was $5,947,018.13, and $1,982,339.38 annually.
Conclusions The study reveals a significant gap between the potential and actual billing for tobacco cessation services, highlighting not only the financial implications of missed opportunities but the validation of health system’s public health impact. Underbilling contributes to considerable annual revenue loss and undermines primary prevention efforts against tobacco-related diseases. Our findings illuminate the need for enhanced billing practices and systemic changes, including policy improvements that influence proper billing to promote public health benefits through improved tobacco cessation interventions.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The WellSpan Health Institutional Review Board (IRB) waived full ethical review, categorizing the study as "non-human subjects research" (IRB: HE-2023-101) according to the regulations established by the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under 45 CFR 46.102 and 21 CFR 50.3, respectively
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵# mrauhut{at}wellspan.org, eanselm{at}msn.com
All authors have contributed significantly to the work, meet ICMJE criteria, and approve the manuscript for submission. There are no conflicts of interest to disclose, financial or otherwise, and all study procedures were conducted under ethical standards. No funding was received for this study.
Summary of the major changes made: 1.Clarification of Billing Rates: We have revised the abstract and methods section to clearly define and calculate both per-encounter and per-patient billing rates, addressing the confusion highlighted by peer reviewers. 2.Methods Explanation: Enhanced the description of our methodology to better explain how patients were identified as smokers, including the dynamic identification process and the handling of eligibility throughout the study period. 3.Revenue Calculations: Improved the explanation of our revenue loss calculations, ensuring a clearer distinction between services provided but not billed and those not provided. 4.Limitations: Added more detailed discussions on systemic barriers to effective tobacco cessation interventions and acknowledged the limitations of our data, including the exclusion of certain outpatient specialties and potential underreporting due to EMR inconsistencies. 5.Updated References and Data: Incorporated recent studies and data to support our findings and revised several sections for improved readability and accuracy.
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
