NEVVI Medicare utilization intelligence
+ Build a code basket
Market snapshot

99213 in AZ CY2024

Medicare Part B FFS · CY2024 · as published by CMS

99213 — Established patient office or other outpatient visit with low level od decision making, if using time, 20 minutes or more

Billing groups
1,231
Named-group FFS services
1,167,723
FFS of Medicare
49%
Services YoY
+0.1%
FFS enrollment -0.7%
Estimated all-Medicare volume FFS + estimated MA estimate
~2,350,427 services

1,167,723 observed fee-for-service (50%) · ~1,182,704 estimated Medicare Advantage. Scaled from the observed floor by each state’s fee-for-service share (FFS share as of 2024) — scaled estimate — assumes MA utilization mirrors FFS; not an observation. How we scale

Named-group submitted charges
$217.9M
Named-group allowed amount
$96.1M
Named-group Medicare payments
$66.9M
Avg charge / svc
$187
Avg allowed / svc
$82
Avg payment / svc
$57
Average charge per group
$54 1,231 groups · avg submitted charge / service $1,333
Market analyticsPlatform
a taste of the twelve-year trend layer

Nevvi's market analytics platform — code baskets, market structure and share, the twelve-year trend layer — is built and not launched yet. We're gathering interest in it.

Notify me at launch →

Specialty market — Otolaryngology: 24,965 services across 13 groups; top group 51%. See Otolaryngology across all states →

Refine: practice size any 5+ 25+ 100+ independent only
Filter results: clear filters

Email me this CSV

Data year: CY2024 CY2023 CY2022 🔒 CY2021 🔒 CY2020 🔒
Physician groups ranked by 99213 services, CY2024
#Physician group City Specialty Providers 99213 svcs Submitted charges Avg charge Medicare $ locked column Share of specialty*Share of state* Phone
1 VALLEY ENT PC SCOTTSDALE OTOLARYNGOLOGY 71 12,732 $2,258,861 $177 premium 51.0% 0.8% (480) 847-1193
2 ARIZONA EAR NOSE AND THROAT PHYSICIANS PLLC SUN CITY WEST OTOLARYNGOLOGY 3 2,685 $354,189 $132 premium 10.8% 0.2% (623) 975-1660
3 NEUROLOGICAL ASSOCIATES OF TUCSON TUCSON OTOLARYNGOLOGY 60 2,259 $411,226 $182 premium 9.0% 0.1% (520) 795-7750
4 MARICOPA EAR NOSE AND THROAT P C TEMPE OTOLARYNGOLOGY 2 1,725 $250,125 $145 premium 6.9% 0.1% (480) 820-1200
5 BILTMORE EAR NOSE AND THROAT PC PHOENIX OTOLARYNGOLOGY 15 1,533 $271,721 $177 premium 6.1% 0.1% (602) 956-1250
6 PRESCOTT EAR NOSE AND THROAT PLLC PRESCOTT OTOLARYNGOLOGY 5 998 $114,770 $115 premium 4.0% 0.1%
7 ARIZONA OTOLARYNGOLOGY CONSULTANTS, PC GLENDALE OTOLARYNGOLOGY 22 854 $131,060 $153 premium 3.4% 0.1% (602) 938-3205
8 ARIZONA EAR CENTER PC PHOENIX OTOLARYNGOLOGY 2 536 $87,370 $163 premium 2.1% 0.0% (602) 307-9919
9 NORTH VALLEY EAR NOSE AND THROAT ASSOCIATES PC PHOENIX OTOLARYNGOLOGY 5 455 $56,841 $125 premium 1.8% 0.0% (602) 688-6500
10 TRINITY ENT AND FACIAL AESTHETICS LLC GILBERT OTOLARYNGOLOGY 2 448 $169,183 $378 premium 1.8% 0.0% (480) 558-3223
11 ADVANCED EAR NOSE AND THROAT ASSOCIATES PC PHOENIX OTOLARYNGOLOGY 2 352 $44,000 $125 premium 1.4% 0.0% (602) 944-3311
12 BRYAN D FRIEDMAN DO LLC PAYSON OTOLARYNGOLOGY 3 203 $37,504 $185 premium 0.8% 0.0% (480) 664-0125
13 ELITE ENT PHOENIX OTOLARYNGOLOGY 2 185 $37,000 $200 premium 0.7% 0.0% (602) 802-8240

*"Share of specialty" is the group's share of disclosed Medicare-FFS services for the primary code among groups with the SAME modal specialty in the state; "share of state" is the same figure against the whole state. Specialty is each group's modal member specialty from CMS's clinician register — a multi-specialty group carries one label. Where fewer than 11 groups share the specialty in the state, the specialty share renders "—" — the specialty benchmark is suppressed (fewer than 11 groups) and the state share alongside is the benchmark. Group figures sum clinicians affiliated with exactly one group. See Methods.

Comparing against an all-payer estimate?

These are exact counts from Medicare fee-for-service claims — roughly a third to half of most procedure markets, depending on payer mix. Modeled all-payer databases project the remainder statistically; we publish the audited floor and label it as such. Same market, different denominator. How the numbers reconcile →