Sex Differences in Radiologist Salary in U.S. Public Medical Schools.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate salary differences between male and female academic radiologists at U.S. medical schools. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Laws in several U.S. states mandate public release of government records, including salary information of state employees. From online salary data published by 12 states, we extracted the salaries of all academic radiologists at 24 public medical schools during 2011-2013 (n = 573 radiologists). In this institutional review board-approved cross-sectional study, we linked these data to a physician database with information on physician sex, age, faculty rank, years since residency, clinical trial involvement, National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding, scientific publications, and clinical volume measured by 2013 Medicare payments. Sex difference in salary, the primary outcome, was estimated using a multilevel logistic regression adjusting for these factors. RESULTS: Among 573 academic radiologists, 171 (29.8%) were women. Female radiologists were younger (48.5 vs 51.6 years, p = 0.001) and more likely to be assistant professors (50.9% [87/171] vs 40.8% [164/402], p = 0.026). Salaries between men and women were similar in unadjusted analyses ($290,660 vs $289,797; absolute difference, $863; 95% CI, -$18,363 to $20,090), and remained so after adjusting for age, faculty rank, years since residency, clinical trial involvement, publications, total Medicare payments, NIH funding, and graduation from a highly ranked medical school. CONCLUSION: Among academic radiologists employed at 24 U.S. public medical schools, male and female radiologists had similar annual salaries both before and after adjusting for several variables known to influence salary among academic physicians.

Focal Cystic Pancreatic Lesion Follow-up Recommendations After Publication of ACR White Paper on Managing Incidental Findings.

PURPOSE: To describe the variation in radiologists' follow-up recommendations for focal cystic pancreatic lesions (FCPL) after publication of the 2010 ACR incidental findings White Paper and determine adherence to guidance of the ACR Incidental Findings Committee. METHODS: Institutional Review Board approval was obtained for this retrospective, HIPAA-compliant observational study. Patients with FCPL were identified from abdominal CT and MRI reports generated in 2013 using natural language processing software. Patient-, lesion-, and radiologist-specific variables were recorded. Primary outcome was whether a follow-up recommendation was made, and if it included a specific study or intervention and recommended time for follow-up. χ2 and logistic regression models were used to identify predictors and controlled for recommendation. These data were compared with 2009 data obtained before the White Paper's publication. Secondary outcome was adherence to the ACR's guidance. RESULTS: During calendar year 2013, 1,377 reports describing FCPLs were identified in 1,038 patients. After excluding examinations from low-volume readers (n = 80), radiologists recommended follow-up imaging in 13.5% (175/1,297) of cases, a decrease from 2009 when it was recommended in 23.7% (221/933) of cases (P < .001). Findings were consistent across radiologists after controlling for patient- and lesion-specific variables. Variability in follow-up recommendations persists between radiologists (2.4-fold difference in 2013 versus 2.8-fold difference in 2009). Radiologists adhered to ACR guidance principles 47.4% of the time. CONCLUSIONS: Despite published guidance recommendations and reported awareness of them, fewer than half of follow-up recommendations for FCPL are consistent with the guidance and considerable variability persists among radiologists.

JOURNAL CLUB: Predictors of Provider Response to Clinical Decision Support: Lessons Learned From the Medicare Imaging Demonstration.

OBJECTIVE: The efficacy of imaging clinical decision support (CDS) varies. Our objective was to identify CDS factors contributing to imaging order cancellation or modification. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This pre-post study was performed across four institutions participating in the Medicare Imaging Demonstration. The intervention was CDS at order entry for selected outpatient imaging procedures. On the basis of the information entered, computerized alerts indicated to providers whether orders were not covered by guidelines, appropriate, of uncertain appropriateness, or inappropriate according to professional society guidelines. Ordering providers could override or accept CDS. We considered actionable alerts to be those that could generate an immediate order behavior change in the ordering physician (i.e., cancellation of inappropriate orders or modification of orders of uncertain appropriateness that had a recommended alternative). Chi-square and logistic regression identified predictors of order cancellation or modification after an alert. RESULTS: A total of 98,894 radiology orders were entered (83,114 after the intervention). Providers ignored 98.9%, modified 1.1%, and cancelled 0.03% of orders in response to alerts. Actionable alerts had a 10 fold higher rate of modification (8.1% vs 0.7%; p < 0.0001) or cancellation (0.2% vs 0.02%; p < 0.0001) orders compared with nonactionable alerts. Orders from institutions with preexisting imaging CDS had a sevenfold lower rate of cancellation or modification than was seen at sites with newly implemented CDS (1.4% vs 0.2%; p < 0.0001). In multivariate analysis, actionable alerts were 12 times more likely to result in order cancellation or modification. Orders at sites with preexisting CDS were 7.7 times less likely to be cancelled or modified (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Using results from the Medicare Imaging Demonstration project, we identified potential factors that were associated with CDS effect on provider imaging ordering; these findings may have implications for future design of such computerized systems.

Use of Public Data to Target Variation in Providers' Use of CT and MR Imaging among Medicare Beneficiaries.

PURPOSE: To examine geographic variation in providers' use of diagnostic imaging to identify potential targets for quality improvement initiatives after adjusting for imaging referral across hospital referral regions (HRRs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using two Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services datasets, the authors included all claims for beneficiaries enrolled in the Medicare fee-for-service program. Diagnostic imaging procedures were selected on the basis of common procedure coding system codes, excluding interventional procedures. The authors assessed providers' use of imaging for each HRR after creating an imaging referral index (IRI) to adjust for imaging referral rates across HRRs. Relative risk statistics were used to assess geographic variation. The authors calculated two imaging measures for computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging: IRI-adjusted utilization intensity (number of examinations per 1000 beneficiaries) and total payments (in dollars, after deducting deductibles and coinsurances) in each HRR. High-impact regions were defined as those in the highest deciles for both imaging intensity and payment. RESULTS: For 34 million Medicare beneficiaries, 124 million unique diagnostic imaging services (totaling $5.6 billion) were performed in 2012. The average adjusted CT utilization intensity ranged from 330.4 studies per 1000 beneficiaries in the lowest decile to 684.0 in the highest decile (relative risk, 2.1); adjusted MR imaging utilization intensity varied from 105.7 studies per 1000 beneficiaries to 256.3 (relative risk, 2.4). The most common CT and MR imaging procedures were head CT and lumbar spine MR imaging. CONCLUSION: With use of public data, the authors identified a wide variation in imaging use across the United States. Potential targets for future imaging quality improvement initiatives include head CT and lumbar spine MR imaging.

Radiology utilization in the emergency department: trends of the past 2 decades.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to assess radiology utilization trends for emergency department (ED) patients from 1993 through 2012. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For this retrospective study, we reviewed radiology utilization at a 793-bed quaternary care academic medical center from January 1, 1993, through December 31, 2012, during which time the number of ED patient visits increased from approximately 48,000 to 61,000, and determined the number of imaging studies by modality (radiography, sonography, CT, MRI, other) and associated relative value units (RVUs). We used linear regression to assess for trends in the number of imaging RVUs and imaging accession numbers, our primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. RESULTS: The total RVUs attributable to ED imaging per 1000 ED visits increased 208% from 1993 to 2007 (p < 0.0001) and then decreased 24.7% by 2012 (p = 0.0019). The total number of imaging accession numbers per 1000 ED visits increased 47.8% from 1993 until 2005 (p = 0.0003) and then decreased 26.9% by 2012 (p < 0.0001). CT RVUs per 1000 ED visits increased 493% until 2007 (p < 0.0001) and then decreased 33.4% (p < 0.0001), and MRI RVUs increased 2475% until 2008 (p < 0.0001) and then decreased 20.6% (p < 0.0032). Sonography RVUs increased 75.7% over the study period (p < 0.0001), whereas radiography RVUs decreased 28.1% (p = 0.0009). CONCLUSION: After a period of substantial increase from 1993 to 2007, volume-adjusted ED imaging RVUs declined from 2007 through 2012, largely because of the decreasing use of CT and MRI. Additional studies are needed to determine the causes of this decline, which may include quality improvement activities, advocacy for appropriateness by leadership, concerns regarding radiation exposure and cost, and health information technology interventions.

Impact of IT-enabled intervention on MRI use for back pain.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of a multifaceted, clinical decision support (CDS)-enabled intervention on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) use in adult primary care patients with low back pain. METHODS: After a baseline observation period, we implemented a CDS targeting lumbar-spine MRI use in primary care patients with low back pain through our computerized physician order entry, as well as 2 accountability tools: mandatory peer-to-peer consultation when test utility was uncertain and quarterly practice pattern variation reports to providers. Our primary outcome measure was rate of lumbar-spine MRI use. Secondary measures included utilization of MRI of any body part, comparing it with that of a concurrent national comparison, as well as proportion of lumbar-spine MRI performed in the study cohort that was adherent to evidence-based guideline. Chi-squared, t-tests, and logistic regression were used to assess pre- and postintervention differences. RESULTS: In the study cohort preintervention, 5.3% of low back pain-related primary care visits resulted in lumbar-spine MRI, compared with 3.7% of visits postintervention (P <.0001, adjusted odds ratio 0.68). There was a 30.8% relative decrease (6.5% vs 4.5%, P <.0001, adjusted odds ratio 0.67) in the use of MRI of any body part by the primary care providers in the study cohort. This difference was not detected in the control cohort (5.6% vs 5.3%, P = .712). In the study cohort, adherence to evidence-based guideline in the use of lumbar-spine MRI increased from 78% to 96% (P = .0002). CONCLUSIONS: CDS and associated accountability tools may reduce potentially inappropriate imaging in patients with low back pain.

Impact of provider-led, technology-enabled radiology management program on imaging.

OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to assess the impact of a provider-led, technology-enabled radiology medical management program on high-cost imaging use. METHODS: This study was performed in the ambulatory setting of an integrated healthcare system. After negotiating a risk contract with a major commercial payer, we created a physician-led radiology medical management program to help address potentially inappropriate high-cost imaging use. The radiology medical management program was enabled by a computerized physician order entry system with integrated clinical decision support and accountability tools, including (1) mandatory peer-to-peer consultation with radiologists before order completion when test utility was uncertain on the basis of order requisition; (2) quarterly practice pattern variation reports to providers; and (3) academic detailing for targeted outliers. The primary outcome measure was intensity of high-cost imaging, defined as the number of outpatient computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and nuclear cardiology studies per 1000 patient-months in the payer's panel. Chi-square test was used to assess trends. RESULTS: In 1.8 million patient-months from January 2004 to December 2009, 50,336 eligible studies were performed (54.1% CT, 40.3% MRI, 5.6% nuclear cardiology). There was a 12.0% sustained reduction in high-cost imaging intensity over the 5-year period (P < .001). The number of CT studies performed decreased from 17.5 per 1000 patient-months to 14.5 (P < .01); nuclear cardiology examinations decreased from 2.4 to 1.4 (P < .01) per 1000 patient-months. The MRI rate remained unchanged at 11 studies per 1000 patient-months. CONCLUSION: A provider-led radiology medical management program enabled through health information technology and accountability tools may produce a significant reduction in high-cost imaging use.

Large-scale automated assessment of radiologist adherence to the Physician Quality Reporting System for stroke.

PURPOSE: Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS) measure 10 assesses the percentage of radiology reports for possible stroke that document the presence or absence of hemorrhage, mass, and acute infarction. Although it is an important report quality metric, determining adherence to this measure is often laborious, limiting its practical use. The aim of this study was to assess adherence to PQRS measure 10 using an automated approach to facilitate continuous measurement. A secondary goal was to identify explanatory variables that may affect adherence. METHODS: To determine measure adherence, a computerized algorithm was built, validated, and executed on 4,045 reports from CT and MRI examinations performed between January 2008 and October 2010 in patients with suspected stroke. Radiologist adherence was measured, accounting for differences in imaging modality, the presence of abnormalities, and trainee participation in report creation. RESULTS: Of 4,045 reports, 58.1% met the PQRS requirement, documenting all 3 components. Although the presence of infarct increased the chance of PQRS adherence (P < .001), the existence of hemorrhage had the opposite effect (P < .001). Reports that had trainee participation were more likely to be in accordance with PQRS standards (62% vs 47%, P < .001). After controlling for pertinent variables, more than 2-fold variation in individual PQRS adherence (27%-68%) remained (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: A considerable portion of eligible radiology reports do not include all components proposed by PQRS measure 10. An important contributor to performance gaps resides in individual physician variability. By automating measurement and monitoring of radiologist PQRS performance, informatics tools may enable targeted interventions to improve report quality.

Repeat abdominal imaging examinations in a tertiary care hospital.

BACKGROUND: Reducing unnecessary repeat imaging may reduce waste and costs, and improve health care quality. We aimed to quantify repeat imaging rates in patients with abdominal imaging examinations, and identify factors associated with repeat imaging. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed all diagnostic abdominal computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), ultrasound (US), fluoroscopy, and radiograph reports performed at our institution between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2009. Primary outcome measure was the rate of repeat abdominal imaging (RAI) examinations, defined as any imaging examination of the abdomen on the same patient within 0-90 days of the first (enrollment) examination. We used natural language processing tools to extract recommendations for follow-up imaging from radiology reports. Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were fitted to determine the effect of patient age, sex, study modality, care setting, follow-up recommendations, and history of neoplasm on the primary outcome over time. RESULTS: Over 10 years, 245,184 abdominal imaging examinations were performed (43.2% CT, 20.6% US, 16.6% radiograph, 13.9% fluoroscopy, 5.7% MRI). The RAI rate remained unchanged (41.2% to 41.7%); unadjusted RAI volume increased from 6596 to 12,218 (P <.01). Most repeat studies (88.2%) were not preceded by a radiologist's recommendation. Practice setting, study modality, patient age, sex, underlying health condition, and radiologist's recommendations were associated with higher rate of repeat abdominal imaging examinations. CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion of abdominal imaging examinations result in a repeat study. Many factors contribute to repeat imaging, including patient age, sex, underlying disease, initial study modality, practice setting, and radiologist's recommendation.

Acute pancreatitis: imaging utilization practices in an urban teaching hospital--analysis of trends with assessment of independent predictors in correlation with patient outcomes.

PURPOSE: To evaluate imaging utilization trends in patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) and to assess independent predictors of radiology usage in relation to patient outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval was obtained for this HIPAA-compliant study; written informed consent was waived. AP-related radiologic studies in 252 patients admitted for AP between June 2005 and December 2007 were collected during and for a 1-year period after hospitalization. Clinical data were collected from patients' medical records, while imaging data were obtained from the radiology information system. Linear regression models were used to investigate predictors and time trends of imaging utilization, after adjustment for confounders. Patient outcomes, measured by using mortality, intensive care unit admission, need for surgical intervention, organ failure, and persistent systemic inflammatory response syndrome, were evaluated by using logistic regression. RESULTS: Mean utilization was 9.9 radiologic studies per patient (95% confidence interval: 7.5, 12.3), with relative value unit (RVU) of 7.8 (95% confidence interval: 6.3, 9.4). Utilization was highest on day 0, declining rapidly by day 4; 53% of imaging occurred during initial hospitalization. Chest radiography (38%) and abdominal computed tomography (CT) (17%) were the most commonly performed studies. Patients with longer hospital stay (P = .001), higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score (P = .0012), higher pain levels (P = .003), drug-induced AP (P = .002), and prior episodes of AP (P < .001) underwent significantly more radiologic studies. After adjustment for confounders, a 2.5-fold increase in the use of high-cost (CT and magnetic resonance imaging) examinations and a 1.4-fold increase in RVUs per case-mix-adjusted admissions (P < .05) were observed during the 2.5-year study period. This increased use was not associated with improvement in patient outcomes. CONCLUSION: AP severity explained substantial variation in imaging utilization. After case-mix adjustment for severity and other patient level factors, there was still increasing use over the course of time without notable improvement in patient outcomes.