Economic modeling comparing trauma and general surgery reimbursement.
BACKGROUND: The viability of trauma care as a surgical subspecialty is continually challenged by economic pressures related to reimbursement and opportunity costs. METHODS: The literature was examined for articles focused on economic implications of a trauma focused surgical practice. Economic forecasting techniques were applied using a recalculating spreadsheet to examine charge and revenue generation comparing the effects of numerous variables affecting a trauma or general surgical service. RESULTS: Elective general surgery practices derive the majority of revenues from procedural services, whereas trauma practices derive the majority of revenues from evaluation and management. Only centers with high admission volume can expect trauma surgeons to cover salary and expenses, predictably in association with high opportunity costs. CONCLUSION: The differences in time, effort, and patient volume required for a trauma surgeon to generate revenues comparable to an elective practice are dramatic. The current system creates disincentives for surgeons to participate in trauma care.