Back to Authors

Patrinely, James R.

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0979-1625

Mayo Clinic

Mayo Clinic

Citations 3

The Importance of Financial Metrics in Physician Funding and Performance Evaluation
Patrinely, James R. , Walker, Sallie, Glassman, Gabriella E. , Davis, Matthew J. , Khan, Umraz , Drolet, Brian C. , Forte, Antonio J. , Patrinely, J Randall, Walker, Sallie H, Abu-Ghname, Amjed, Perdikis, Galen, Forte, Antonio Jorge , Abu‐Ghname, Amjed , Perdikis, Galen

Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery | April 23, 2021 | Volume: 147 | Issue: 5 | Pages: 1213-1218

10.1097/prs.0000000000007882 Get It

Background: Financial key performance indicators are often used to evaluate performance. Understanding of key performance indicators can be crucial for career advancement and bargaining leverage in resource negotiations. This study aimed to identify the most important key performance indicators used in surgical funding requests and understand how to use these metrics in clinical practice. Methods: In two tertiary medical centers, funding requests for surgeon gap support (2019 to 2020) and equipment (2017 to 2019) within departments of surgery were reviewed. The requesting department, approval status, and amount allotted were recorded. In requests for gap support, projections for contribution margin, operating room volume, charges, collections, and relative value units were tracked. Projected contribution margin and cost savings were recorded for equipment funding requests. Results: There were 40 gap support and 24 equipment requests, and all were approved. Most gap support requests included collections (90.0 percent), charges (87.5 percent), operating room cases (80.0 percent), relative value units (77.5 percent), and hospital contribution margin (77.5 percent). The most represented departments were general surgery (37.5 percent), neurosurgery (22.5 percent), and plastic surgery (15.0 percent). The departments that submitted the most equipment requests were general surgery (28.0 percent) and neurosurgery (28.0 percent). Most requests included projections for contribution margin (95.8 percent) and cost savings (87.4 percent). Projected hospital contribution margin correlated with the amount of funds allotted for surgeon support (r = 0.409; p = 0.022). Conclusions: This multicenter study identified the importance of using key performance indicators for a successful financial outcome in funding requests. In addition, the authors demonstrate the need for surgeons to understand their own key performance indicators. Surgeons should advocate for increased transparency to better understand their financial contributions and performance.
Acellular Dermal Matrix Performance Compared with Latissimus Dorsi Myocutaneous Flap in Expander-Based Breast Reconstruction
Patrinely, James R. , Farinas, Angel F. , Al-Majed, Bader, Forte, Antonio J. , TerKonda, Sarvam P. , TerKonda, Sarvam , Forte, Antonio Jorge , Perdikis, Galen

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery - Global Open | October 1, 2019 | Volume: 7 | Issue: 9 | Pages: e2414

10.1097/gox.0000000000002414 Get It

Background: Latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap (LDMF) with tissue expander provides excellent results in breast reconstruction. Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) has been used in expander-based reconstruction (EBR) with good results. This study assesses how ADM compares to LDMF in EBR. Methods: The cohorts comprised 124 patients (218 breasts) who had EBR using ADM between 2006 and 2012, and 242 patients (266 breasts) who had EBR using LDMF between 1994 and 2012. Postoperative complications, reoperations, Breast-Q scores, and objectively assessed aesthetic outcomes were compared. Results: Median age was 55 years for both ADM (range 23–84) and LDMF (range 26–88) groups. No statistically significant differences were noted between the groups in the rates of major postoperative complications (P > 0.3). Forty-nine of the 218 (22.5%) in the ADM group and 67 of 266 (25.2%) in the LDMF group had a total of 63 and 84 reoperations, respectively (P = 0.52), with no significant differences in the reoperations rate (P > 0.3). No significant differences were observed in the Breast-Q scores. Some categorical differences were noted in the aesthetic outcomes; however, the difference between the overall outcomes was not significant (P = 0.54). Conclusion: Our study revealed no statistically significant differences in the complications or reoperation rates, patient satisfaction, or overall aesthetic outcomes when comparing the use of ADM to LDMF in EBR. In conclusion, this study supports the hypothesis that ADM performs as well as LDMF in EBR.
The Value of Business Training in the Quest for Sustainable Health Care Delivery in Plastic Surgery
Patrinely, James R. , Drolet, Brian C. , Forte, Antonio J. , Forte, Antonio Jorge , Perdikis, Galen

Annals of Plastic Surgery | July 11, 2019 | Volume: 83 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 121-122

10.1097/sap.0000000000002010 Get It