Current Controversies in Radiology on Cost, Reimbursement, and Price Transparency: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review.

Many believe that fundamental reform of the U.S. health care system is overdue and necessary given rising national health care expenditures, poor performance on key population health metrics, meaningful health disparities, concerns about potential financial toxicity of care, inadequate price transparency, pending insolvency of Medicare Part A, increasing commercial insurance premiums, and large uninsured and underinsured populations. The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, an independent congressional agency, believes that part of this reform includes redistribution of reimbursements away from specialties such as radiology. Thus, despite an increase in the Medicare population and spending, Medicare payments for medical imaging have been decreasing for years. Further, the No Surprises Act, a federal law intended to curb the problem of surprise medical billing, was repurposed in federal rulemaking to reduce reimbursement from commercial payers to certain specialties, including radiology. In this article, we examine challenges facing the U.S. health care system, focusing on cost, reimbursement, and price transparency and the role of radiology in addressing such challenges. Medical imaging is a minor contributor to national health care expenditures but has an outsized impact on patient care. The radiology community should work together to reinforce the value of medical imaging and reduce inappropriate utilization of low-value care.

Radiology in the Era of Value-based Healthcare: A Multi-Society Expert Statement from the ACR, CAR, ESR, IS3R, RANZCR, and RSNA.

Background The Value-Based Healthcare (VBH) concept is designed to improve individual healthcare outcomes without increasing expenditure, and is increasingly being used to determine resourcing of and reimbursement for medical services. Radiology is a major contributor to patient and societal healthcare at many levels. Despite this, some VBH models do not acknowledge radiology's central role; this may have future negative consequences for resource allocation. Methods, findings and interpretation This multi-society paper, representing the views of Radiology Societies in Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, describes the place of radiology in VBH models and the health-care value contributions of radiology. Potential steps to objectify and quantify the value contributed by radiology to healthcare are outlined. Published under a CC BY 4.0 license.

Radiology in the Era of Value-Based Healthcare: A Multi-Society Expert Statement From the ACR, CAR, ESR, IS3R, RANZCR, and RSNA.

BACKGROUND: The Value-Based Healthcare (VBH) concept is designed to improve individual healthcare outcomes without increasing expenditure, and is increasingly being used to determine resourcing of and reimbursement for medical services. Radiology is a major contributor to patient and societal healthcare at many levels. Despite this, some VBH models do not acknowledge radiology's central role; this may have future negative consequences for resource allocation. METHODS, FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATION: This multi-society paper, representing the views of Radiology Societies in Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, describes the place of radiology in VBH models and the health-care value contributions of radiology. Potential steps to objectify and quantify the value contributed by radiology to healthcare are outlined.

Trends in Diagnostic Imaging Utilization among Medicare and Commercially Insured Adults from 2003 through 2016.

Background Trends in noninvasive diagnostic imaging (NDI) utilization rates have predominantly been reported in Medicare enrollees. To the authors' knowledge, there has been no prior direct comparison of utilization rates between Medicare and commercially insured patients. Purpose To analyze trends in NDI utilization rates by modality, comparing Medicare fee-for-service and commercially insured enrollees. Materials and Methods This study was a retrospective trend analysis of NDI performed between 2003 and 2016 as reported in claims databases for all adults enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare and for roughly 9 million commercially insured patients per year. The commercially insured patients were divided into two populations: those aged 18-44 years and those aged 45-64 years. The same procedure code definitions for NDI were applied to both Medicare and commercial claims, rates were calculated per 1000 enrollees, and trends were reported over time in aggregate followed by modality (CT, MRI, nuclear imaging, echocardiography, US, radiography). Join-point regression was used to model annual rates and to identify statistically significant (P < .05) changes in trends. Results In almost all instances, Medicare enrollees had the highest utilization rate for each modality, followed by commercially insured patients aged 45-64 years, then aged 18-44 years. All three populations showed utilization growth through the mid to late 2000s (images per 1000 enrollees per year for Medicare: 91 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 34, 148]; commercially insured patients aged 45-64 years: 158 [95% CI: 130, 186]; aged 18-44 years: 83 [95% CI: 69, 97]), followed by significant declining trends from the late 2000s through early 2010s (images per 1000 enrollees per year for Medicare: -301 [95% CI: -510, -92]; commercially insured patients aged 45-64 years: -54 [95% CI: -69, -39]; aged 18-44 years: -26 [95% CI: -31, -21]) coinciding with code-bundling events instituted by Medicare (CT, nuclear imaging, echocardiography). There were significant trend changes in modalities without code bundling (MRI, radiography, US), although flat trends mostly were exhibited. After the early 2010s, there were significant trend changes largely showing flat utilization growth. The notable exception was a significant trend change to renewed growth of CT imaging among commercially insured patients aged 45-64 years and Medicare enrollees after 2012, although at half the prior rate (images per 1000 enrollees per year for Medicare: 17 [95% CI: 6, 28]; commercially insured patients aged 45-64 years: 11 [95% CI: 2, 20]). Conclusion Noninvasive diagnostic imaging utilization trends among commercially insured individuals are similar to those in Medicare enrollees, although at lower rates. Earlier rapid growth has ceased and, except for CT, utilization has stabilized since the early 2010s. © RSNA, 2019 See also the editorial by Hentel and Wolk in this issue.

Utilization Trends in Abdominal Imaging, 2004-2016.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to analyze recent trends in abdominal imaging utilization in the Medicare population. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Medicare Part B databases for 2004-2016 were reviewed, and all Current Procedural Terminology codes pertaining to noninvasive imaging of the abdomen and pelvis were identified. Codes were grouped into six categories: CT and CT angiography (CTA), MRI and MR angiography (MRA), ultrasound, radionuclide imaging, radiography, and gastrointestinal fluoroscopy. Annual utilization rates per 1000 Medicare beneficiaries were calculated. Medicare physician specialty codes were used to identify studies performed by radiologists versus nonradiologist physicians. Reimbursements were determined. RESULTS. Total abdominal imaging utilization decreased from 558.0 examinations per 1000 Medicare beneficiaries in 2004 to 441.9 in 2016 (-20.8%). CT and CTA examinations increased by 22.5% from 2004 to 2010, followed by a sharp drop in 2011 caused by code bundling. From 2011 to 2016, CT and CTA use increased by only 7.2%. Radiography utilization decreased from 129.6 examinations per 1000 Medicare beneficiaries in 2004 to 91.5 in 2016 (-29.4%). Radionuclide studies decreased from 14.0 to 9.5 (-32.1%), and gastrointestinal fluoroscopy decreased from 37.8 examinations to 22.5 (-40.5%). Utilization of ultrasound increased slightly (1.5%), whereas MRI and MRA utilization sharply increased on a percentage basis (81.2%). Reimbursements peaked in 2009 at $1.704 billion, dropped substantially in 2011 because of code bundling, and remained relatively stable thereafter. The radiologists' market share of abdominal imaging was approximately 87% in both 2004 and 2016. CONCLUSION. Abdominal imaging utilization rates have declined in recent years, in part due to code bundling, but also largely because of a decrease in the use of abdominal radiography, gastrointestinal fluoroscopy, and nuclear imaging. Reimbursements have also declined. This study also showed that most of the abdominal imaging was performed by radiologists.

Advanced Imaging Interpretation by Radiologists and Nonradiologist Physicians: A Training Issue.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to examine the degree to which nonradiologist physicians provide formal interpretations for advanced imaging and to consider whether adequate training can be achieved for those physicians. This investigation assumed that hospitals are the only places where formal imaging training occurs. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The CMS Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary Master Files (PSPSMFs) of the Medicare Part B datasets for 2015 were reviewed. We selected the Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for four categories of noninvasive diagnostic imaging: CT, MRI, PET, and general nuclear imaging. Medicare place-of-service codes allowed us to determine the location of each study interpretation. We narrowed our analysis to data from the three major hospital places of service: inpatient facilities, hospital outpatient departments, and emergency departments. Provider specialties were determined using Medicare's 108 specialty codes. Procedure volumes among nonradiologist physicians were compared with those among radiologists. RESULTS. Of the 17,824,297 hospital-based CT examinations performed in the Medicare fee-for-service population, radiologists interpreted 17,698,360 (99.29%) and nonradiologists interpreted 125,937 (0.71%). Of the 4,512,627 MRI examinations performed, radiologists interpreted 4,469,275 (99.04%) and nonradiologist physicians interpreted 43,352 (0.96%). Of 391,688 PET studies performed, radiologists interpreted 368,913 (94.19%) and nonradiologist physicians interpreted 22,775 (5.81%). Of the 2,070,861 general nuclear medicine studies performed, radiologists interpreted 1,307,543 (63.14%) and nonradiologist physicians interpreted 763,318 (36.86%). Cardiologists had the largest involvement of nonradiologist physicians, contributing approximately 3% of all advanced imaging interpretations. All other nonradiologist physicians interpreted a tiny fraction of advanced imaging studies. CONCLUSION. Besides radiologists and cardiologists, no other medical specialty provides sufficient education for their trainees and practitioners in advanced imaging interpretation to justify allowing them to interpret these studies in practice, except under carefully controlled circumstances.

Recent Trends in Endovascular and Surgical Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Disease in the Medicare Population.

OBJECTIVE. Although radiologists developed endovascular treatment of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) in the 1960s, vascular surgeons and cardiologists have become increasingly involved in its application. The purpose of this study was to examine utilization trends in endovascular and surgical treatment of PAD in recent years in the Medicare population. CONCLUSION. Surgical treatment of PAD has decreased each year from 2011 to 2016, whereas endovascular treatment has increased each year. By 2016, Medicare patients who needed revascularization for PAD were more than four times as likely to undergo endovascular as they were to undergo surgical treatment. Between 2011 and 2016, radiologists, vascular surgeons, and cardiologists all increased their endovascular volume, but by 2016, vascular surgeons and cardiologists performed three of every four endovascular procedures for the Medicare population. While only 12% of the total endovascular procedures for PAD were performed in 2016, radiology has grown its procedural volume each year from 2011 through 2016.

Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement and Retrieval Rates among Radiologists and Nonradiologists.

PURPOSE: To evaluate inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement and retrieval rates among radiologists, vascular surgeons, cardiologists, other surgeons, and all other health care providers for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries in the years 2012-2015. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The nationwide Medicare Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary Master Files were used to determine the volume and utilization rate of IVC filter placement, IVC filter repositioning, and IVC filter retrieval, which correspond to procedure codes 37191, 37192, and 37193, respectively. Procedural code 37193 was not available before 2012, so data were reviewed for the years 2012-2015. RESULTS: The total volume of Medicare IVC filter placement decreased from 57,785 in 2012 to 44,378 in 2015, with radiologists responsible for 60% of all filter placements. Volume of IVC filter placement declined across all specialties, including radiologists, who placed 33,744 in 2012 and 27,957 in 2015. In contrast, total retrieval of IVC filters increased from 4,060 removals in 2012 to 6,166 in 2015. Retrieval rate per 100,000 Medicare beneficiaries increased from 11 in 2012 to 16 in 2015. Radiologists removed the bulk of the filters: 64% in both 2012 and 2015. Vascular surgeons, cardiologists, and other surgeons retrieved, respectively, 20%, 10%, and 5% of all IVC filters in 2012 and 22%, 9%, and 5% in 2015. CONCLUSIONS: From 2012 to 2015, IVC filter placement steadily decreased across all specialties. Retrieval rate of IVC filters continued to rise over the same period. Radiologists were responsible for the majority of IVC filter placements and retrievals.

Coronary CT Angiography: Use in Patients With Chest Pain Presenting to Emergency Departments.

OBJECTIVE: Previously published reports have shown that coronary CT angiography (CCTA) is a more efficient method of diagnosis than myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) and stress echocardiography for patients presenting to emergency departments (EDs) with acute chest pain. In light of this evidence, the objective of this study was to examine recent trends in the use of these techniques in EDs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The nationwide Medicare Part B databases for 2006-2015 were the data source. The Current Procedural Terminology, version 4, codes for CCTA, MPI, and stress echocardiography were selected. Medicare place-of-service codes were used to determine procedure volumes in EDs. Medicare specialty codes were used to ascertain how many of these examinations were interpreted by radiologists, cardiologists, and other physicians as a group. RESULTS: From 2006 to 2015, there was essentially no change in the number of MPI examinations performed in EDs for patients using Medicare (22,342 in 2006, 22,338 in 2015) or in the number of stress echocardiograms (3544 in 2006, 3520 in 2015). By contrast, the number of CCTA examinations increased rapidly, from 126 in 2006 to 1919 in 2015 (compound annual growth rate, 35%). Despite this rapid growth, patients in EDs underwent 11.6 times as many MPI as CCTA examinations in 2015. In that last year of the study, radiologists interpreted 78% of ED MPI and 83% of ED CCTA examinations. CONCLUSION: Use of CCTA in EDs has increased rapidly, but far more MPI examinations are still being performed. This finding suggests that recently acquired evidence is not yet being fully acted upon.

Screening Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Utilization Updates.

OBJECTIVE: There have been many recent developments in breast imaging, including the 2009 revision of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force's breast cancer screening guidelines and the approval of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) for clinical use in 2011. The objective of this study is to evaluate screening mammography utilization trends among the Medicare population from 2005 to 2015 and examine the volume of DBT studies performed in 2015, the first year for which procedural billing codes for DBT are available. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed national Medicare Part B Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary master files from 2005 to 2015, to determine the annual utilization rate of screening mammography on the basis of procedure codes used for film-screen and digital screening mammography. We also used the Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary master files to determine the volume of screening and diagnostic DBT studies performed in 2015. RESULTS: The utilization rate of screening mammography per 1000 women in the Medicare fee-for-service population increased gradually every year, from 311.5 examinations in 2005 to a peak of 322.9 examinations in 2009, representing a compound annual growth rate of 0.9%. In 2010, the utilization rate abruptly decreased by 4.3% to 309.2 examinations, and it has not since recovered to pre-2010 levels. In 2015, 18.9% of screening and 16.2% of diagnostic digital mammography examinations included DBT as an add-on procedure. CONCLUSION: In contrast to the annual increase in screening mammography utilization from 2005 to 2009, an abrupt sustained decline in screening occurred beginning in 2010, coinciding with the release of U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendations. DBT utilization was somewhat limited in 2015, occurring in conjunction with less than 20% of digital mammography examinations.

Provider Distribution Changes in Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry in the Medicare Population Over the Past Decade.

Both radiologists as well as nonimaging physicians perform dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) imaging in the United States. This study aims to compare provider distribution between these physician groups on the Medicare population, which is the predominant age group of patients evaluated by this imaging procedure. Using the 2 relevant Current Procedural Terminology, Fourth Edition codes for DXA scans, source data were obtained from the CMS Physician Supplier Procedure Summary Master Files from 2003 through 2013. DXA scan procedure volumes for radiologists and nonradiologists on Medicare patients were tabulated. Utilization rates were calculated. From 2003 to 2013, the total number of DXA scans performed on Medicare patients decreased by 2%. However, over the same period, the number of scans performed by radiologists had increased by 25% over nonimaging specialists, whose utilization had declined by approximately the same amount. From 2003 to 2013, the rate of utilization of DXA scans in the Medicare fee-for-service population declined somewhat. However, radiologists continue to gain market share from other specialists and now predominate in this type of imaging by a substantial margin.

The Choosing Wisely initiative of the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation: what will its impact be on radiology practice?

OBJECTIVE. The Choosing Wisely initiative is a large-scale effort to reduce the use of unnecessary tests and procedures, many of which involve imaging. CONCLUSION. By identifying specific tests and procedures that are often overused, unnecessary, inappropriate, or ineffective, Choosing Wisely places the onus on physicians to reduce their use.

Financial impact of Medicare code bundling of CT of the abdomen and pelvis.

OBJECTIVE: On January 1, 2011, the Current Procedural Terminology version 4 codes for CT of the abdomen and CT of the pelvis were bundled together. The relative value units attached to the new single codes were lower than the sum of the relative value units accruing to the two separate codes. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of this new policy on Medicare part B reimbursements for these studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The nationwide 2001-2011 Medicare part B data files were used to select the codes for CT of the abdomen and pelvis before and after bundling occurred in 2011. Procedure volumes were ascertained, and utilization rates per 1000 Medicare beneficiaries were calculated. Aggregate Medicare reimbursements were determined, and Medicare specialty codes were used to determine the reimbursements to radiologists. RESULTS: In 2011, use of CT of the two body regions remained approximately the same as in 2010 (before bundling), but because the two codes were bundled into one in 2011, the actual rate per 1000 decreased from 277.1 to 148.1. Medicare reimbursements for CT of the abdomen and pelvis had risen steadily from 2001 to 2005 but remained relatively stable thereafter through 2010. However, in 2011 reimbursements decreased from $971.5 million the previous year to $687.0 million--a drop of $284.5 million (29%) in a single year. Radiologists experienced $218.6 million of this decrease. CONCLUSION: Code bundling of CT of the abdomen and CT of the pelvis resulted in a large reduction in reimbursements for imaging.

QRSE: a novel metric for the evaluation of trainee radiologist reporting skills.

Diagnostic radiology training programs must produce highly skilled diagnostic radiologists capable of interpreting radiological examinations and communicating results to clinicians. Established training performance tools evaluate interpretive skills, but trainees' competency in reporting skills is also essential. Our semi-automated passive electronic tool entitled the Quantitative Reporting Skills Evaluation (QRSE) allows radiology training programs to evaluate the quantity of edits made to trainee preliminary reports by attending physicians as a metric to evaluate trainee reporting performance. Consecutive report pairs and metadata extracted from the radiology information system were anonymized and exported to a MySQL database. To perform the QRSE, for each report pair, open source software was first utilized to calculate the Levenshtein Percent (LP), the percent of character changes required to convert each preliminary report to its corresponding final report. The average LP (ALP), ALP for each trainee, and standard deviations were calculated. Eighty-four trainees and 56 attending radiologists interpreted 228,543 radiological examinations during the study period. The overall ALP was 6.38 %. Trainee-specific ALPs ranged from 1.1 to 15.3 %. Among trainee-specific ALPs, the standard deviation was 3.7 %. Our analysis identified five trainees with trainee-specific ALPs above 2 standard deviations from the mean and 14 trainees with trainee-specific ALPs less than 1 standard deviation below the mean. The QRSE methodology allows for the passive, quantitative, and longitudinal evaluation of the reporting skills of trainees during diagnostic radiology residency training. The QRSE identifies trainees with high and low levels of edits to their preliminary reports, as a marker for trainee overall reporting skills, and thus represents a novel performance metric for radiology training programs.

Radiology Report Comparator: a novel method to augment resident education.

Attending radiologists routinely edit radiology trainee dictated preliminary reports as part of standard workflow models. Time constraints, high volume, and spatial separation may not always facilitate clear discussion of these changes with trainees. However, these edits can represent significant teaching moments that are lost if they are not communicated back to trainees. We created an electronic method for retrieving and displaying changes made to resident written preliminary reports by attending radiologists during the process of radiology report finalization. The Radiology Information System is queried. Preliminary and final radiology reports, as well as report metadata, are extracted and stored in a database indexed by accession number and trainee/radiologist identity. A web application presents to trainees their 100 most recent preliminary and final report pairs both side by side and in a "track changes" mode. Web utilization audits showed regular utilization by trainees. Surveyed residents stated they compared reports for educational value, to improve future reports, and to improve patient care. Residents stated that they compared reports more frequently after deployment of this software solution and that regular assessment of their work using the Report Comparator allowed them to routinely improve future report quality and improved radiological understanding. In an era with increasing workload demands, trainee work hour restrictions, and decentralization of department resources (e.g., faculty, PACS), this solution helps to retain an important part of the educational experience that would have otherwise run the risk of being lost and provides it to the trainees in an efficient and highly consumable manner.

The effect of self-referral on utilization of advanced diagnostic imaging.

OBJECTIVE: This article reviews the evidence on the relationship between recent increases in utilization of diagnostic imaging and self-referral. The evidence shows that self-referral invariably leads to higher utilization and the attendant higher costs. CONCLUSION: Because most physicians do not own advanced imaging equipment, their own best interests are being thwarted by the practice of self-referral. Congress and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services should restrict the in-office ancillary services exception to the Stark laws as it applies to advanced imaging.

Bending the curve: the recent marked slowdown in growth of noninvasive diagnostic imaging.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to determine whether there has been any change in the rapid growth pattern that has characterized noninvasive diagnostic imaging in recent years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The annual nationwide Medicare Part B databases were used. All Current Procedural Terminology codes for discretionary noninvasive diagnostic imaging were identified. The overall utilization rates per 1,000 fee-for-service beneficiaries were calculated from 1998 through 2008, as were rates by modality. Determination was made as to whether studies were interpreted by radiologists or nonradiologist physicians. RESULTS: The total utilization rate of noninvasive diagnostic imaging grew at a compound annual growth rate of 4.1% from 1998 to 2005, but this decreased to 1.4% from 2005 to 2008. From 2005 through 2008, the overall growth trends flattened dramatically for MRI and nuclear medicine and abated somewhat for CT, ultrasound, and echocardiography. In ambulatory settings, flattening of the advanced imaging growth curves was seen in both private offices and hospital outpatient facilities. From 1998 to 2005, the compound annual growth rate was 3.4% among radiologists and 6.6% among nonradiologist physicians. From 2005 to 2008, the compound annual growth rate decreased to 0.8% among radiologists and 1.8% among nonradiologists. CONCLUSION: There has been a distinct slowing in the growth of discretionary noninvasive diagnostic imaging in the Medicare fee-for-service population since 2005. The slowdown has been most pronounced in MRI and nuclear medicine. This should allay some of the concerns of policymakers and payers. Both before and after 2005, growth was approximately twice as rapid among nonradiologist physicians as among radiologists.