Are Gender-Affirming Plastic Surgeons Adequately Compensated? An Analysis of Relative Value Units

Background: Gender-affirming surgery (GAS) has a complicated history within US health care. As GAS procedures and reimbursement availability continue to uptrend, the present study aims to investigate whether compensation is equitable between GAS procedures and general plastic surgery procedures.Methods: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried for all surgeries performed by plastic surgeons from 2016 to 2020. Cases were assigned to the GAS or non-GAS cohort using ICD-10 codes. Duplicate Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes were removed for analysis. Operative time, total wRVUs, wRVUs per hour (wRVU/h), reoperation/readmission rate, and number of concurrent procedures were compared between the cohorts.Results: A total of 132,319 non-GAS and 3,583 GAS were identified. After duplicate CPT removal, 299 cases (21 unique CPTs) remained in the GAS cohort and 20,022 (37 unique CPTs) in the non-GAS cohort. Operative time was higher in the GAS cohort (262.9 vs 120.7 min, P < 0.001), as were total wRVUs (59.4 vs 21.6, P < 0.001). Reoperation/readmission rate (7.0% vs 6.0%) and wRVU/h (15.8 vs 15.1) were not significantly different (all P > 0.05). There was a positive correlation between total operative time and total wRVUs (P < 0.001) and a negative correlation between total operative time and wRVU/h (P < 0.001).Conclusions: Proportional wRVUs are allocated to gender affirming plastic procedures. However, the RVU scale does not allocate proportional wRVUs to longer operative times for both GAS and general plastic surgeries. Compensation for gender affirming plastic surgeries is higher than that of general plastic surgeries; however, there is no difference in wRVUs per hour on comparison.