Introduction: We sought to determine if work relative value unit differences exist between analogous, sex-specific procedures.
Methods: Representatives from the AUA and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists independently reviewed the entire procedural code set and identified sex-specific procedures that had an analogous procedure in the opposite sex. These pairs were then evaluated and compared using current American Medical Association Relative Value Scale Update Committee methodology. Comparable code pair values were then examined to determine any systemic bias in the work relative value units assigned between the procedures. Mean differences and 95% confidence intervals were used to determine any differences in procedure or physician time values. The methodology used considered global period, intraservice time, total time, hospital days, postoperative office visits, and the date of the committee review.
Results: Of the 10 directly analogous code pairs reviewed, 7 of the female procedures had higher work relative value unit differences (range 0.29-6.47), and 3 of the male procedures had higher work relative value unit differences (range 1.23-2.34). There was no statistical difference between the code pair work relative value units. The work relative value unit per minute of intraservice time and total time were not statistically different.
Conclusions: In this study, we compared operative procedures performed in women with clinically comparable operative procedures performed in men that had similar surgical approaches, global periods, and valuation methodologies. Overall, no statistical differences in work relative value units were demonstrated.
Keywords: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; compensation and redress; gender bias; resource-based relative value scale.