Do hospitals adhere to the Blue Cross/Blue Shield Association's guidelines for admission chest x-rays and ECGs?

In 1987, the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association (BCBSA) promulgated guidelines for some common diagnostic studies, including preoperative and general hospital admission chest x-rays and electrocardiograms. Pennsylvania Blue Shield, through reviews of patients' charts at 10 hospitals in Pennsylvania, examined whether chest x-ray and ECG studies were being ordered routinely upon hospital admission, without regard to medical necessity, and whether those that had been ordered fell within the BCBSA guidelines. Most charts reviewed (82%) had no studies that fell outside the guidelines' indications. In 24% of the cases, neither study had been performed. Some 23% of chest x-rays and 14% of ECGs performed were found to be unindicated. However, performances of the hospitals were quite variable, ranging from 8-31% of admissions with at least one unindicated study. At no hospital was there evidence that studies were ordered routinely on all admissions.

Disparities in reimbursement to radiologists and nonradiologists for 65 common outpatient imaging studies.

The authors examined global charges (incorporating both technical and professional components) and global reimbursement allowances for all radiographic and ultrasound (US) examinations performed on Pennsylvania Blue Shield subscribers in the Lehigh Valley area of Pennsylvania during 1990. Data for radiologists and nonradiologists were compared with respect to all procedure codes for which at least 25 claims were submitted, yielding a sample of 40,619 radiographic examinations (54 procedure codes) and 9,761 US examinations (11 procedure codes). Radiologists' mean charges were higher than those of nonradiologists for 38 of the 54 radiographic codes. However, nonradiologists received higher mean reimbursement allowances for 39 of the 54 codes. Among the 11 US codes, nonradiologists' mean charges were higher for 10 and they received higher mean reimbursement allowances for seven. The averages of the mean reimbursement allowances for individual codes were higher for nonradiologists in both the radiographic and US categories. Pennsylvania Blue Shield has begun steps to eliminate disparities in reimbursements to providers who submit claims for imaging examinations.

Self-referral in private offices for imaging studies performed in Pennsylvania Blue Shield subscribers during 1991.

PURPOSE: To define the frequency of physician self-referral for diagnostic imaging studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: High-volume radiographic (n = 65) and ultrasound (US) (n = 29) procedural codes in claims filed by Pennsylvania Blue Shield subscribers were analyzed to determine private-office (nonhospital) utilization of these examinations by radiologists and nonradiologists during 1991. A total of 787,703 radiographic and 159,281 US claims were filed. RESULTS: Nonradiologists self-referred 550,878 radiographic examinations (69.9%) and 99,931 US examinations (62.7%). Patterns of utilization varied considerably by anatomic category: The imaging studies with the highest rates of utilization by nonradiologists were skeletal radiography, vascular US, and obstetric and pelvic US. Aggregate reimbursement allowance by Pennsylvania Blue Shield for all examinations in these 94 codes was approximately $68 million, of which $44 million (65%) went to non-radiologists.

Diagnostic radiology peer review: a method inclusive of all interpreters of radiographic examinations regardless of specialty.

A proposed method of assessing the quality of diagnostic radiographic examinations includes peer review designed to evaluate physicians, including nonradiologists, involved in the performance and interpretation of such examinations. A pilot project evaluated this system with randomly selected Pennsylvania Blue Shield data files of 10 providers billing for chest radiography interpretations during the second quarter of 1989. Of the 98 chest radiographs reviewed blindly, all inadequately marked radiographs and incomplete written reports were produced by nonradiologists. Technical quality of images obtained by radiologists did not significantly differ from that of images obtained by nonradiologists (P = .189). All five interpretive errors that could have seriously affected the patient's health care were produced by nonradiologists (P = .019). Four of these serious errors were made by providers billing for fewer than 25 radiographs. While administrative and time cost limitations are obvious, this method of peer review encompasses all physicians billing for a particular radiographic service, irrespective of specialty.