Managed care's attempts to capture aesthetic surgery

Managed care organizations recently have attempted to add aesthetic surgery to their line of available services. To better understand the challenges posed by these actions, all members of the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery were surveyed about managed care overtures to aesthetic plastic surgeons, their responses, and the likely responses of their patients. The goal was to examine both the supplier and consumer ends of the aesthetic surgery market to determine the likely effects of managed care's attempts to capture aesthetic surgery. A total of 632 plastic surgeons returned the surveys (response rate, 54.5 percent). Twenty-two percent reported being approached by managed care organizations about joining a panel of aesthetic surgeons. Approximately one-quarter of the plastic surgeons said they would participate in aesthetic surgery panels developed by managed care organizations. Characteristics significantly associated with willingness to participate were solo practice structure, a low percentage of practice revenues from aesthetic surgery, and a very competitive practice environment. Plastic surgeons believed that their colleagues would be even more willing to acquiesce to managed care aesthetic surgery; more than one-third said that 25 to 50 percent of their colleagues would join, and nearly one-third thought that more than half would participate. Plastic surgeons believed that many of their patients would also participate in managed care aesthetic surgery. Twenty-four percent thought that more than half of their patients would choose an aesthetic surgeon through their managed care organization if that organization developed a network for aesthetic surgery. This figure increased to almost 40 percent if the organization would deny coverage for complications resulting from nonpanel surgeons, and to 41 percent if the organization would offer price discounts. This survey shows that most plastic surgeons are against managed care aesthetic surgery. But it also shows that some plastic surgeons will participate, and that most plastic surgeons think many of their colleagues and patients will do likewise. This means that managed care organizations have the potential to make inroads in aesthetic surgery on both the supplier and consumer ends of the market. To prevent managed care from capturing aesthetic surgery, plastic surgeons must anticipate the likely business strategy of managed care. To this end, they must understand the steps involved in the creation of a new service business and offer organized countermeasures against each of them.     

Discount cosmetic surgery: industry trends and strategies for success

Discount cosmetic surgery is a topic of interest to plastic surgeons. To understand this trend and its effects on plastic surgeons, it is necessary to review the economics of cosmetic surgery, plastic surgery's practice environment, and the broader business principles of service industries.Recent work looked at the economics of the plastic surgery market. This analysis demonstrated that increased local density of plastic surgeons was associated with lower adjusted fees for cosmetic procedures. A survey of plastic surgeons about their practice environment revealed that 93 percent categorized the majority of their patients as very or moderately price-sensitive. Fully 98 percent described their business climate as very or moderately competitive and most plastic surgeons thought they lost a sizable number of cosmetic patients within the last year for reasons of price.A standard industry analysis, when applied to cosmetic surgery, reveals the following: an increased number of surgeons leads to lower fees (reducing their bargaining power as suppliers), patients are price-sensitive (increasing their bargaining power as buyers), and there are few barriers to entry among providers (allowing potential new entrants into the market). Such a situation is conducive to discounting taking hold-and even becoming the industry norm.In this environment, business strategy dictates there are three protocols for success: discounting, differentiation, and focus. Discounting joins the trend toward cutting fees. Success comes from increasing volume and efficiency and thus preserving profits. Differentiation creates an industrywide perception of uniqueness; this requires broadly positioning plastic surgeons as holders of a distinct brand identity separate from other "cosmetic surgeons." The final strategy is to focus on a particular buyer group to develop a market niche, such as establishing a "Park Avenue" practice catering to patients who demand a prestigious surgeon, although this is likely a small segment of the overall patient population. Plastic surgeons that buck the trend toward discount cosmetic surgery must take concrete and potentially costly steps to implement a plausible strategy for distinguishing their practices within the crowded cosmetic surgery market.     

Career evaluation and the decision process for plastic surgery graduates

National experience shows that 50 percent of physicians change positions within the first 2 years of practice. Because of market pressures, medicine in general and plastic surgery in particular are shifting away from solo practice. The authors examine the primary reasons for turnover and discuss job search priorities for recent plastic surgery graduates and established surgeons in job transition, with a current analysis of the different job opportunities available, ranging from government to private practice. The advantages and disadvantages of different positions are compared and income data are presented. Academic income is close to that of private practice at a mean of $366,141 annually but requires more work as measured by an overall higher relative value unit of productivity. The concept of creating a personal inventory before seeking the best job match is introduced.     

The effect of increased plastic surgeon supply on fees for aesthetic surgery: an economic analysis

The size of the plastic surgery workforce has important effects on the financial environment of the specialty. Economic theory predicts that increasing the area supply of surgeons performing aesthetic surgery will result in lower fees for their services. This study tested that theory in the actual aesthetic surgery marketplace. The study examined the ratio of plastic surgeons to the general population of several states. It then traced the aesthetic surgery fees resulting from different densities of area plastic surgeons. This information was economically analyzed to project the fee effects of possible future changes in the number of practicing plastic surgeons. For the states of New York, California, and Texas, there is a proportional decrease in fees as the density of plastic surgeons increases. For example, New York has 34 percent more plastic surgeons proportionally than Texas, and its fees are 30 percent lower in real dollars. Economic analysis can project the fee effects of changing the supply of surgeons performing aesthetic surgery. The analysis reveals that a 30 percent national increase in the supply of plastic surgeons would lower fees by approximately 32 percent. Similarly, if the number of plastic surgeons increases by 50 percent, fees will decrease by approximately 53 percent. However, these fee effects can be mitigated by expanding the demand for aesthetic surgery. In conclusion, the size of the plastic surgery workforce has profound effects on the fees paid for aesthetic surgery, and the magnitude of these effects can be understood, predicted, and optimized using the tools of economics.     

The economics of plastic surgery practices: trends in income, procedure mix, and volume

Anecdotally, plastic surgeons have complained of working harder for the same or less income in recent years. They also complain of falling fees for reconstructive surgery and increasing competition for cosmetic surgery. This study examined these notions using the best available data. To gain a better understanding of the current plastic surgery market, plastic surgeon incomes, fees, volume, and relative mix of cosmetic and reconstructive surgery were analyzed between the years 1992 and 2002. To gain a broader perspective, plastic surgeon income trends were then compared with those of other medical specialties and of nonmedical professions. The data show that in real dollars, plastic surgeon incomes have remained essentially steady in recent years, despite plastic surgeons increasing their surgery load by an average of 41 percent over the past 10 years. The overall income trend is similar to that of members of other medical specialties and other nonmedical professionals. The average practice percentage of cosmetic surgery was calculated and found to have increased from 27 percent in 1992 to 58 percent in 2002. This most likely can be explained by the findings that real dollar fees collected for cosmetic surgery have decreased very slightly, whereas those for reconstructive procedures have experienced sharp declines. This study demonstrates that plastic surgeons have adjusted their practice profiles in recent years. They have increased their case loads and shifted their practices toward cosmetic surgery, most likely with the goal of maintaining their incomes. The strategy appears to have been successful in the short term. However, with increasing competition and falling prices for cosmetic surgery, it may represent a temporary bulwark for plastic surgeon incomes unless other steps are taken.     

Staff surgery--the inevitable question

The results of a survey of 450 plastic surgeons regarding the practice of operating on their staff members is presented. An overwhelming majority (85 percent) of responding surgeons do operate on their staff. Whether surgery is a "right" of employment or a "reward" for service was addressed. Seventy-two percent felt surgery was a "reward," while only 8 percent felt it was a "right." The results found complications to be relatively minor but numerous (23.5 percent). The need for an office policy is stressed to help eliminate misunderstandings with other employees, and a model office policy is presented and endorsed.     

Plastic surgery and psychotherapy in the treatment of 100 psychologically disturbed patients

This paper reviews the senior author's long-term experience with the surgical-psychiatric treatment of 100 aesthetic surgery patients with significant psychological disturbances. Patients with psychological disturbances of a magnitude generally considered an "absolute contraindication" for surgery were operated on and later assessed to determine the psychological impact of surgery. Patient follow-up averaged 6.2 years (maximum follow-up 25.7 years). Of the 87 patients who underwent operation (7 patients were refused surgery and 6 voluntarily deferred surgery), 82.8 percent had a positive psychological outcome, 13.8 percent experienced "minimal" improvement from surgery, and 3.4 percent were negatively affected by surgery. There were no lawsuits, suicides, or psychotic decompensations. Patients with severe psychological disturbances frequently benefited from combined surgical-psychiatric treatment designed to address the patient's profound sense of deformity. This study suggests that plastic surgeons are "passing up" a significant number of patients who may be helped by combined surgical-psychological intervention.     

Lipoplasty claims experience of U.S. insurance companies

An analysis of medical liability claims for lipoplasty (liposuction) from January of 1985 through June of 1998 compared the insurance industry experience of plastic surgeons with that of other physicians. The Data Sharing Project database of the Physician Insurers Association of America, a trade association of professional liability companies owned and operated by medical professionals that collectively insure approximately 60 percent of America's private practice physicians, was queried. Of the nearly 45,000 total entries in the database, 292 were claims for adverse events related to lipoplasty or liposuction. These raw data were stratified by physician specialty, severity of complication, practice location, patient gender, indemnity payment, and other insurance industry-relevant variables.To simplify interspecialty comparisons, we normalized the claims rate to incidents per 100 insured physicians. The indexed lipoplasty claims rate was 3.0 per 100 insured plastic surgeons and 4.1 for other surgeons; the indexed lipoplasty claims rate for nonsurgical specialists was 2.5 per 100 insured dermatologists and 2.3 for other nonsurgeons. The higher claims rate for surgeons most likely reflects the wider scope of full-service aesthetic surgery performed by surgical specialists. Nearly two-thirds of claims (65.4 percent) during the 13-year survey period were the result of hospital-based lipoplasty; 20.9 percent were office-based claims. The prevalence of hospital-based claims may be a consequence of both historical bias introduced by hospital-based specialty surgery in the early years and prudent patient safety considerations during performance of complex or prolonged procedures in more recent years.Two-thirds of the claims (67 percent) arose from informed-consent or breach-of-contract issues, far higher than the 26 percent aggregate claims norm. The mean indemnity payment was $94,534 per lipoplasty claim; claims paid against board-certified specialists averaged $83,350. Consistent with national lipoplasty demographics, 87 percent of claims were brought by women and 13 percent were brought by men. Seven fatalities (three women and four men) were noted; cause of death is not recorded in this type of database.     

An outcome study comparing intravenous sedation with midazolam/fentanyl (conscious sedation) versus propofol infusion (deep sedation) for aesthetic surgery

The purpose of this study was to determine the differences in measurable outcomes following aesthetic procedures performed under intravenous sedation with incremental doses of midazolam and fentanyl and those performed under propofol infusion. The authors' hypothesis was that the differences in these outcome parameters are not significant between these intravenous sedation protocols. All intraoperative and perioperative records of 84 consecutive patients having aesthetic surgery under a conscious sedation protocol using incremental doses of intravenous midazolam and fentanyl were retrospectively reviewed and compared with the records of a second group of 85 patients having aesthetic surgery under a deep sedation regimen based primarily on propofol infusion. All procedures were hospital based and performed by two surgeons. Twenty-eight different parameters were examined by chart review. In addition, a patient questionnaire was used to assess patient satisfaction and patient recall of operative and perioperative pain, anxiety, nausea, and vomiting. Multivariate statistical analysis was conducted. The two sedation groups were similar with regard to aesthetic procedures performed and patient demographics. The mean duration of operative time was statistically equivalent (152 minutes and 153 minutes). In both groups, there were minor adverse intraoperative events reported but no significant complications. Transient hypotension was more common in the propofol infusion group (12.9 percent versus 2.4 percent, p = 0.018), but no patient required intervention beyond reducing the sedative agent or increasing intravenous fluids. The amount of supplemental fentanyl given intraoperatively was significantly higher in the group whose primary agent for sedation was propofol infusion than the group who received midazolam/fentanyl (209 mug and 143 mug, respectively). The overall questionnaire response rate was 80 percent for both groups. The midazolam/fentanyl sedation group had more recall of "unpleasant intraoperative events" (17 percent versus 3 percent, p = 0.007). However, both groups had low recall of intraoperative pain, anxiety, and nausea. The propofol infusion group experienced significantly more nausea in the recovery room (p = 0.002), nausea at the time of discharge (p = 0.009), and nausea the evening after the operation (p = 0.013). Greater than 90 percent of the patients in both groups would have the same anesthetic in the future rather than undergo general anesthesia. Patient safety, outcomes, and satisfaction are similar in plastic surgery procedures performed under sedation protocols using either incremental doses of midazolam and fentanyl or propofol infusion. All operative and postoperative outcomes for pain, anxiety, and vomiting were similar in the two groups except for immediate postoperative nausea, which was higher in the propofol infusion group. The overall satisfaction of patients undergoing plastic surgery procedures under these intravenous sedation protocols appears very high.     

González-Ulloa's Manifesto on aesthetic surgery

The realization that the proper development of aesthetic surgery was hindered by a bias against such practice by departmental heads and editors of medical journals led Dr. Mario González-Ulloa from Mexico to formulate a "Manifesto" on this speciality in the 1960s. This Manifesto has been of utmost importance to our speciality because it served to disseminate responsible opinion concerning aesthetic surgery among specialists. Although the bare text of the Manifesto was published in 1966, its content has so far been lost to future generations of plastic surgeons. Because its place in the history of aesthetic plastic surgery needs to be acknowledged, González-Ulloa's Manifesto is presented and discussed here.     

The effect of increased consumer demand on fees for aesthetic surgery: an economic analysis

Economic theory dictates that changes in consumer demand have predictable effects on prices. Demographics represents an important component of demand for aesthetic surgery. Between the years of 1997 and 2010, the U.S. population is projected to increase by 12 percent. The population increase will be skewed such that those groups undergoing the most aesthetic surgery will see the largest increase. Accounting for the age-specific frequencies of aesthetic surgery and the population increase yields an estimate that the overall market for aesthetic surgery will increase by 19 percent. Barring unforeseen changes in general economic conditions or consumer tastes, demand should increase by an analogous amount. An economic demonstration shows the effects of increasing demand for aesthetic surgery on its fees. Between the years of 1992 and 1997, there was an increase in demand for breast augmentation as fears of associated autoimmune disorders subsided. Similarly, there was increased male acceptance of aesthetic surgery. The number of breast augmentations and procedures to treat male pattern baldness, plastic surgeons, and fees for the procedures were tracked. During the study period, the supply of surgeons and consumer demand increased for both of these procedures. Volume of breast augmentation increased by 275 percent, whereas real fees remained stable. Volume of treatment for male pattern baldness increased by 107 percent, and the fees increased by 29 percent. Ordinarily, an increase in supply leads to a decrease in prices. This did not occur during the study period. Economic analysis demonstrates that the increased supply of surgeons performing breast augmentation was offset by increased consumer demand for the procedure. For this reason, fees were not lowered. Similarly, increased demand for treatment of male pattern baldness more than offset the increased supply of surgeons performing it. The result was higher fees. Emphasis should be placed on using these economic relationships to expand the demand for aesthetic surgery.     

Aesthetic surgery economics: lessons from corporate boardrooms to plastic surgery practices

Healthcare traditionally has been described as not conforming to the laws of economics. Consumers pay for aesthetic surgery directly, thus freeing it from the usual confounding factors and making it more likely to comply with the market forces explained by economics. Recent studies have demonstrated the ability of classic economics to analyze, predict, and optimize the financial environment of aesthetic surgery. This article describes economic principles and how they can be applied to aesthetic surgery. Some of the basic instruments of economics include the study of supply and demand, prices, and price elasticity; capital investments; communication and cooperation; and consumer cognitive limitations. Each of these tools offers plastic surgeons the opportunity to gain improved control of their financial environment.     

Surgeon perspectives on surgical options for early-stage breast cancer

To evaluate the practice patterns of general and plastic surgeons regarding patients with early-stage breast cancer, all general and plastic surgeons in Quebec and Maryland were mailed self-administered questionnaires evaluating surgeon demographics, practice patterns, treatment preferences, and satisfaction with the results of lumpectomy and radiation therapy or breast reconstruction. Response rates of 38.3 percent and 26.7 percent were obtained for general surgeons in Quebec and Maryland, respectively. The ratio of reported mastectomies to lumpectomies was 1:2 in Maryland and 1:5 in Quebec. All general surgeons considered lumpectomy an important option. Ninety percent of Maryland surgeons versus 44 percent of Quebec surgeons considered mastectomy important. A total of 53.6 percent versus 24.9 percent of general surgeons in Maryland and Quebec, respectively, considered delayed reconstruction an important option. Additionally, 81.3 percent of Maryland surgeons considered immediate reconstruction important, and 79.6 percent discussed it with all stage I or II patients. More than 75 percent of Quebec general surgeons reported discussing immediate or delayed reconstruction with < or =50 percent of these women. Response rates of 53.6 percent and 48.8 percent were obtained for plastic surgeons in Quebec and Maryland, respectively. In one year Quebec plastic surgeons reported that they performed less than half the number of reconstructions performed by Maryland plastic surgeons (7.2 versus 17.3). In Quebec, 82.3 percent of surgeons reported that they frequently discuss delayed reconstruction, 25.1 percent immediate, 62.5 percent pedicled TRAM, and 51.7 percent nonautogenous options. In Maryland, 74.3 percent of plastic surgeons frequently discuss delayed reconstruction, 95.7 percent immediate, 89.9 percent pedicled TRAM, and 85.9 percent nonautogenous options. For women with early-stage breast cancer, regional variations exist in the surgical options discussed and provided.     

Safety and efficacy of office-based surgery with monitored anesthesia care/sedation in 4778 consecutive plastic surgery procedures

Office-based surgery has several potential benefits over hospital-based surgery, including cost containment, ease of scheduling, and convenience to both patients and surgeons. Scrutiny of office-based surgery by regulators and state-licensing agencies has increased and must be addressed by improved documentation of safety and efficacy. To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the authors' office-based plastic surgery, a review was undertaken of 3615 consecutive patients undergoing 4778 outpatient plastic surgery procedures under monitored anesthesia care/sedation in a single office. The charts of 3615 consecutive patients who had undergone office-based surgery with monitored anesthesia care/sedation between May of 1995 and May of 2000 were reviewed. In all cases, the anesthesia protocol used included sedation with midazolam, propofol, and a narcotic administered by a board-certified registered nurse anesthetist with local anesthesia provided by the surgeon. Charts were reviewed for patient profile, types of procedures, multiple procedures, duration of anesthesia, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, and complications related to anesthesia. Outcomes measured included death, airway compromise, dyspnea, hypotension, venous thrombosis, pulmonary emboli, protracted nausea and vomiting lasting more than 24 hours, and unplanned hospital admissions. Statistical analyses were performed using the Microsoft Excel program and the SAS package. Results were as follows: 92.3 percent of the patients were female and 7.7 percent were male, with a mean age of 42.7 years (range, 3 to 83 years). Patients underwent aesthetic (95.6 percent) and reconstructive (4.4 percent) plastic surgery procedures. Same-session multiple procedures occurred in 24.8 percent of patients. The vast majority of patients were healthy: 84.3 percent of patients were American Society of Anesthesiologists class I, 15.6 percent were class II, and 0.1 percent were class III. The operations required a mean of 111 minutes. There were no deaths, ventilator requirements, deep venous thromboses, or pulmonary emboli. Complications were as follows: 0.05 percent (n = 2) of patients had dyspnea that resolved, 0.2 percent (n = 6) of patients had protracted nausea and vomiting, and 0.05 percent (n = 2) of patients had unplanned hospital admissions (<24 hours). One patient had an emergent intubation. No prolonged adverse effects were noted. There was a 30-day follow-up minimum. Outpatient surgery is an important aspect of plastic surgery. It was shown that office-based surgery with intravenous sedation, performed by board-certified plastic surgeons and nurse anesthetists, is safe. Appropriate accreditation, safe anesthesia protocols, and proper patient selection constitute the basis for safe and efficacious office-based outpatient plastic surgery.     

Craniofacial distraction osteogenesis: a review of 3278 cases

The nascent field of craniofacial distraction osteogenesis has not yet been subjected to a rigorous evaluation of techniques and outcomes. Consequently, many of the standard approaches to distraction have been borrowed from the experience with long bones in orthopedic surgery. The ideal "latency period" of neutral fixation, rate and rhythm of distraction, and consolidation period have not yet been determined for the human facial skeleton. In addition, because the individual craniofacial surgeon's experience with distraction has generally been small, outcomes and meaningful complication rates have not yet been published.In this study, a four-page questionnaire was sent to 2476 craniofacial and oral/maxillofacial surgeons throughout the world, asking about their experiences with distraction osteogenesis. Information about the types of cases, indications for surgery, surgical techniques, postoperative management, outcomes, and complications were tabulated. Of 274 respondents (response rate, 11.4 percent), 148 indicated that they used distraction in their surgical practice. One hundred forty-five completed surveys were entered into a database that provided information about 3278 craniofacial distraction cases. Statistical analyses were performed comparing the rates of premature consolidation, fibrous nonunion, and nerve injury, on the basis of the use of a latency period and different rates and rhythms of distraction. In addition, the rates of all complications were determined and compared on the basis of the number of distraction cases performed per surgeon.The results of the study clearly show a wide variation in the surgical practice of craniofacial distraction osteogenesis. Although the cumulative complication rate was found to be 35.6 percent, there is a pronounced learning curve, with far fewer complications occurring among more experienced surgeons (p < 0.001). The presence of inferior alveolar nerve injury as a result of mandibular distraction was much lower for respondents whose distraction regimens consisted of no more than 1 mm of distraction per day (19.5 percent versus 2.4 percent; p < 0.001). No evidence was found to support the use of a latency period or to divide the daily distraction regimen into more than one session per day. Conclusions could not be drawn from this study regarding the length of the consolidation period. Overall, the surgeon-reported outcomes are comparable with those published for other craniofacial procedures, despite the higher incidence of complications.Although conclusions made on the basis of a subjective questionnaire need to be interpreted cautiously, this study has strength in the large numbers of cases reviewed. Because of the anonymity of responses, it has been assumed that surgeons who responded to the survey reported accurate numbers of complications and successful outcomes. Finally, additional clinical and animal studies that will be of benefit in advancing the field of craniofacial distraction osteogenesis are outlined.     

Planning elective operations on patients who smoke: survey of North American plastic surgeons.

Patient smoking status affects many aspects of plastic surgery, including patient selection, counseling, management, and outcomes. No specific recommendations for performing elective procedures on patients who smoke are available. The goal of this study was to determine the current practice standards and attitudes toward this often controversial topic. In September of 2000, 1600 members of the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery were sent questionnaires, 955 of which were returned. Questions elicited categorical answers, either dichotomous or multiple choice. Data were evaluated using logistic regression and the chi-square and binomial tests. Our results show that 60 percent (p < 0.01) of plastic surgeons routinely perform a less than optimal procedure on their patients who smoke. The survey measured willingness to perform various operative procedures on patients who smoke and types of smoking cessation aids offered. Of those physicians who require patients to quit smoking before surgery, only 16.7 percent (p < 0.01) would perform a nicotine test if they suspected noncompliance. Interestingly, 28.6 percent (p < 0.01) of the physicians responding admit to a smoking history, whereas only 1.5 percent (p < 0.01) continue to smoke, compared with the national smoking rate of almost 25 percent. Physicians who are previous smokers are less likely to offer smoking cessation aids than those who have never smoked, and the proportion not offering aids increases as the amount of previous smoking increases (p = 0.02). This study shows that a wide range of opinions exists on which elective surgical procedures should be performed on patients who smoke. Furthermore, the physician's prior smoking history influences this decision. No clear consensus exists on how best to treat patients who smoke who request elective surgeries. Although surgeons would prefer to operate on nonsmokers, they are faced with a significant population of patients who use tobacco. No clear consensus exists on how best to treat these individuals. Advancements in wound healing research and smoking cessation aids will provide more insight into this treatment dilemma.     

Suction lipectomy: complications and results by survey

In October of 1983, we sent a questionnaire on suction lipectomy to 2524 U.S. and Canadian members of the American Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons. Six-hundred and twelve plastic surgeons returned questionnaires (24.2 percent response rate). One-hundred and seven responding surgeons reported 1573 operations in which suction lipectomy with or without skin excision was used for 2685 procedures on various parts of the body. In the subset of 1249 operations in which suction lipectomy only was used to treat 2261 anatomic areas, surgeons reported greater than 80 percent good or excellent aesthetic results. The overall complication rate was 9.3 percent. The most frequent complications were persistent hypesthesia (2.6 percent), seroma (1.6 percent), and persistent edema (1.4 percent). Skin pigmentation, pain, hematoma, infection, and slough each occurred with an incidence of 1.0 percent or less. Based on the results of this survey, suction lipectomy is a valuable new modality for surgical improvement of body contour.     

Economics of microsurgical cases and routine cases in a medical center

This report describes the economic impact of microsurgical cases and routine plastic surgery cases in our medical center. The study is based on a financial analysis of the practices of two surgeons. Financial data of patient encounters (admission to the hospital or a surgical unit) identified with each surgeon were categorized into microsurgical and related cases and routine cases (including cosmetic procedures and general hand cases). Revenues, costs, and profits were tabulated. Data were analyzed for 2 fiscal years (1994-95 and 1995-96). Analysis of the first fiscal year showed that microsurgery encounters (n = 188) generated $4.4 million in revenue with a profit margin after direct costs of $2.5 million (57 percent) and a net profit, after indirect costs, of $1 million (23 percent). Routine encounters (n = 262) generated $1.7 million with a net loss of -$145,000 after direct and indirect costs. In the second fiscal year, microsurgery encounters (n = 230) had income of $4.7 million, a profit over direct costs of $2.5 million (53 percent), and a net profit after indirect costs of $0.9 million (19 percent). Routine cases (n = 202) in the same period earned $1.3 million with a net loss of -$107,000. This analysis formulates a comprehensive definition of microsurgical practice and shows that cases within this definition generated dramatically higher hospital incomes and profits compared with routine plastic surgical practice. In the circumstances of our medical center, development of this subspecialty is fiscally justifiable.     

Aesthetic outcomes in patients undergoing breast conservation therapy for the treatment of localized breast cancer

Localized breast cancer can be treated with lumpectomy and postoperative radiation therapy, also called breast conservation therapy, with an efficacy equivalent to that of mastectomy. Reports evaluating the effects of radiotherapy suggested that breast conservation therapy had "acceptable" cosmetic outcomes; thus, posttreatment evaluation for aesthetic impact has not been instituted as a standard of care. More recent reports have suggested that the effect of breast conservation therapy on aesthetic outcome is not minimal and that patients may benefit from reconstructive consultation. The purpose of this study was to measure objectively the aesthetic change in women who undergo breast conservation therapy and whether the extent of change is significant enough (objectively and subjectively) to warrant plastic surgery consultation. The authors evaluated 21 patients who had undergone breast conservation therapy. Eleven non-breast cancer patients seeking plastic surgery consultation were used as controls. Standardized five-view photographs (frontal, left and right lateral, and left and right lateral oblique views) were obtained. Patient photograph sets were compiled and evaluated independently by eight reviewers (four surgeons, two nurses, and two medical students). Reviewers evaluated the photographs using the breast asymmetry score (score range, 0 to 9) assessing breast size, ptosis, nipple-areola position, shape, scar appearance, contour deformity, and skin changes. The authors considered 2 SD above the control mean as significant. Breast conservation therapy patients also completed a 15-item questionnaire targeting objective and subjective data about treatment-related breast change. Breast conservation therapy patients had an average treatment-related asymmetry score of 1.93, with 35 percent demonstrating significant change as compared with controls. Although most patients (86 percent) were satisfied with the cancer treatment outcome, all patients noted asymmetry. The authors' data indicate that breast conservation therapy can cause significant asymmetry; thus, an option for plastic surgery consultation as part of the treatment protocol is warranted.