Practice Patterns Surrounding the Use of Tibial Interventions for Claudication in the Medicare Population

Objective: At present, no data are available to support the use of tibial interventions in the treatment of claudication. We characterized the practice patterns surrounding tibial peripheral vascular interventions (PVIs) for patients with claudication in the United States.

Methods: Using 100% Medicare fee-for-service claims from 2017 to 2019, we conducted a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent an index PVI for claudication. Patients with any previous PVI, acute limb ischemia, or chronic limb-threatening ischemia in the preceding 12 months were excluded. The primary outcome was the receipt or delivery of tibial revascularization during an index PVI for claudication, defined as tibial PVI with or without concomitant femoropopliteal PVI. Univariable comparisons and multivariable hierarchical logistic regression were used to assess the patient and physician characteristics associated with the use of tibial PVI for claudication.

Results: Of 59,930 Medicare patients who underwent an index PVI for claudication between 2017 and 2019, 16,594 (27.7%) underwent a tibial PVI (isolated tibial PVI, 38.5%; tibial PVI with concomitant femoropopliteal PVI, 61.5%). Of the 1542 physicians included in our analysis, the median physician-level tibial PVI rate was 20.0% (interquartile range, 9.1%-37.5%). Hierarchical logistic regression suggested that patient-level characteristics associated with tibial PVI for claudication included male sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.23), increasing age (aOR, 1.30-1.96), Black race (aOR, 1.47), Hispanic ethnicity (aOR, 1.86), diabetes (aOR, 1.36), no history of hypertension (aOR, 1.12), and never-smoking status (aOR, 1.64; P < .05 for all). Physician-level characteristics associated with tibial PVI for claudication included early-career status (aOR, 2.97), practice location in the West (aOR, 1.75), high-volume PVI practice (aOR, 1.87), majority of practice in an ambulatory surgery center or office-based laboratory setting (aOR, 2.37), and physician specialty. The odds of vascular surgeons performing tibial PVI were significantly lower compared with radiologists (aOR, 2.98) and cardiologists (aOR, 1.67; P < .05 for all). The average Medicare reimbursement per patient was dramatically higher for physicians performing high rates of tibial PVI (quartile 4 vs quartile 1-3, $12,023.96 vs $692.31 per patient; P < .001).

Conclusions: Tibial PVI for claudication was performed more often by nonvascular surgeons in high-volume practices and high-reimbursement settings. Thus, a critical need exists to reevaluate the indications, education, and reimbursement policies surrounding these procedures.