[Skip to Content]

Claim CME

Health Policy

Administrative Burden and Costs of Prior Authorizations in a Dermatology Department

Educational Objective
To understand the friction created by prior authorization requirements

1 Credit CME

JAMA Dermatology

Published Online: August 26, 2020

Original Investigation

Article Information and Disclosures

Ryan P. Carlisle, BS¹;

Nicholas D. Flint, BS¹;

Zachary H. Hopkins, MD²;

Mark J. Eliason, MD³;

Kristina C. Duffin, MD, MS³;

Aaron M. Secrest, MD, PhD^3,4

Author Affiliations

¹School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
²Department of Dermatology, Broward Health, Fort Lauderdale, Florida
³Department of Dermatology, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
⁴Department of Population Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City

Read article on JAMA Network

Read Article Claim CME

Key Points

Question How common and costly are prior authorizations (PAs) in 1 dermatology practice?

Findings In this cross-sectional study at a large academic department spanning 11 clinical locations in Utah, PAs were found to impose a substantial burden, with median administrative costs per PA of $6.72 overall, and $15.80 for biologics. Most PA appeals were subsequently approved.

Meaning Reforms to the PA system might increase practice efficiencies, decrease administrative costs, and improve patient outcomes.

Abstract

Importance Insurance companies use prior authorizations (PAs) to address inappropriate prescribing or unnecessary variations in care, most often for expensive medications. Prior authorizations negatively affect patient care and add costs and administrative burden to dermatology offices.

Objective To quantify the administrative burden and costs of dermatology PAs.

Design, Setting, and Participants The University of Utah Department of Dermatology employs 2 full-time and 8 part-time PA staff. In this cross-sectional study at a large academic department spanning 11 clinical locations, these staff itemized all PA-related encounters over a 30-day period in September 2016. Staff salary and benefits were publicly available. Data were analyzed between December 2018 and August 2019.

Main Outcomes and Measures Proportion of visits requiring PAs, median administrative time to finalize a PA (either approval or denial after appeal), and median cost per PA type.

Results In September 2016, 626 PAs were generated from 9512 patient encounters. Staff spent 169.7 hours directly handling PAs, costing a median of $6.72 per PA. Biologic PAs cost a median of $15.80 each and took as long as 31 business days to complete. The costliest PA equaled 106% of the associated visit’s Medicare reimbursement rate. Approval rates were 99.6% for procedures, 78.9% for biologics, and 58.2% for other medications. After appeal, 5 of 23 (21.7%) previously denied PAs were subsequently approved.

Conclusions and Relevance Prior authorizations are costly to dermatology practices and their value appears limited for some requests. Fewer unnecessary PAs and appeals might increase practice efficiency and improve patient outcomes.

Claim CME

Sign in to take quiz and track your certificates

Buy This Activity

Article Information

Accepted for Publication: May 1, 2020.

Corresponding Author: Aaron M. Secrest, MD, PhD, Department of Dermatology, University of Utah, 30 N 1900 E, 4A330, Salt Lake City, UT 84132 (aaron.secrest@hsc.utah.edu).

Published Online: August 26, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2020.1852

Author Contributions: Drs Hopkins and Secrest had full access to all the study data and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Concept and design: Carlisle, Hopkins, Eliason, Secrest.

Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Carlisle, Flint, Duffin, Secrest.

Drafting of the manuscript: Carlisle, Flint, Hopkins, Secrest.

Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Carlisle, Hopkins, Eliason, Duffin, Secrest.

Statistical analysis: Carlisle, Flint.Administrative, technical, or material support: Carlisle, Secrest.

Supervision: Secrest.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Duffin reported grants and personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Amgen, grants and personal fees from AbbVie, personal fees from Janssen, grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingerheim, grants and personal fees from Celgene, grants and personal fees from UCB, grants and personal fees from Eli Lilly, grants and personal fees from Novartis, grants from Regeneron, grants and personal fees from Sienna, and grants from Stiefel outside the submitted work. Dr Secrest receives support from a Dermatology Foundation Public Health Career Development Award as well as research grant support from the American Skin Association, National Eczema Association, and National Psoriasis Foundation. No other disclosures were reported.

References

Popatia S , Flood KS , Golbari NM , et al. Examining the prior authorization process, patient outcomes, and the impact of a pharmacy intervention: a single-center review. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81(6):1308-1318. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2019.05.024 PubMed Google Scholar Crossref

Robeznieks A . Prior authorization is a major practice burden. How do you compare? American Medical Association. April 6, 2018. Accessed September 16, 2019. https://www.ama-assn.org/practice-management/sustainability/prior-authorization-major-practice-burden-how-do-you-compare

Mills R . Health care coalition calls for prior authorization reform. American Medical Association. January 25, 2017. Accessed July 16, 2020. https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/health-care-coalition-calls-prior-authorization-reform

Secrest AM , Asgari MM , Kourosh AS , Barbieri JS , Albrecht J ; American Academy of Dermatology Drug Pricing and Transparency Task Force. Prior authorizations for dermatologic medications: an American Academy of Dermatology survey of US dermatology providers and staff. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;77(4):784-786. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2017.05.008 PubMed Google Scholar Crossref

Shah D , Tongbram V , Paly V . Impact of prior authorization restrictions on resource utilization and costs in US health plans: a review of literature. Value Health. 2014;17(7):A418. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2014.08.1019 PubMed Google Scholar Crossref

US Government Accountability Office. Generic drugs under Medicare: Part D generic drug prices declined overall, but some had extraordinary price increases. August 12, 2016. Accessed July 16, 2020. https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-16-706

Albrecht J , Lebwohl M , Asgari MM , et al. The state and consequences of dermatology drug prices in the United States. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;75(3):603-605. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2016.03.053 PubMed Google Scholar Crossref

Balkrishnan R , Bhosle MJ , Fleischer AB Jr , Feldman SR . Prior authorization for topical psoriasis treatments: is it cost-beneficial for managed care? J Dermatolog Treat. 2010;21(3):178-184. doi:10.3109/09546630903268247 PubMed Google Scholar Crossref

Rosenberg ME , Rosenberg SP . Changes in retail prices of prescription dermatologic drugs from 2009 to 2015. JAMA Dermatol. 2016;152(2):158-163. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2015.3897 PubMed Google Scholar Crossref

Rogers AT , Sutherland B , Loss MJ . Prior authorizations for diagnostic skin biopsies: does anyone benefit? JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153(11):1091-1092. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2017.3516 PubMed Google Scholar Crossref

US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Overview of the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (MPFS) search. Updated July 3, 2019. Accessed July 16, 2020. https://www.cms.gov/apps/physician-fee-schedule/overview.aspx

Kostecki J . Dermatology Practice Profile Survey: 2009 Report. American Academy of Dermatology Association; 2009.

Cheng J , Feldman SR . The cost of biologics for psoriasis is increasing. Drugs Context. 2014;3:212266. doi:10.7573/dic.212266 PubMed Google Scholar

Clark JJ , Secrest AM , Hull CM , et al. The effect of omalizumab dosing and frequency in chronic idiopathic urticaria: retrospective chart review. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;74(6):1274-1276. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2015.12.052 PubMed Google Scholar Crossref

Resneck JS Jr . Refocusing medication prior authorization on its intended purpose. JAMA. 2020;323(8):703-704. doi:10.1001/jama.2019.21428 PubMed Google Scholar

Gaines ME , Auleta AD , Berwick DM . Changing the game of prior authorization: the patient perspective. JAMA. 2020;323(8):705-706. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.0070 PubMed Google Scholar

Raper JL , Willig JH , Lin H-Y , et al. Uncompensated medical provider costs associated with prior authorization for prescription medications in an HIV clinic. Clin Infect Dis. 2010;51(6):718-724. doi:10.1086/655890 PubMed Google Scholar Crossref

AMA CME Accreditation Information

Credit Designation Statement: The American Medical Association designates this Journal-based CME activity activity for a maximum of 1.00  AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.

Successful completion of this CME activity, which includes participation in the evaluation component, enables the participant to earn up to:

1.00 Medical Knowledge MOC points in the American Board of Internal Medicine's (ABIM) Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program;;
1.00 Self-Assessment points in the American Board of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery’s (ABOHNS) Continuing Certification program;
1.00 MOC points in the American Board of Pediatrics’ (ABP) Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program;
1.00 Lifelong Learning points in the American Board of Pathology’s (ABPath) Continuing Certification program; and
1.00 CME points in the American Board of Surgery’s (ABS) Continuing Certification program

It is the CME activity provider's responsibility to submit participant completion information to ACCME for the purpose of granting MOC credit.