Updated trends in percutaneous renal arteriography among radiologists and other specialties.

PURPOSE: Prior studies have demonstrated an overall decline in percutaneous renal artery angioplasty with and without stenting from 1988 to 2009. We evaluated the recent utilization trends in percutaneous renal arteriography (PTRA) among radiologists and non-radiologist providers from 2010 to 2018. METHODS: Data from the 2010-2018 nationwide Medicare Part B fee-for-service database were used to tabulate case volumes for PTRA. Annual utilization rates per 10,000 Medicare beneficiaries were calculated and aggregated based on physician specialty: radiologists, cardiologists, vascular surgeons, general surgeons, or others. RESULTS: From 2010 to 2018, the overall utilization rate of PTRA markedly declined (-72% change; from 15.5 to 4.3 cases per 10,000 Medicare beneficiaries). Proportionally, the cardiologist share of PTRA saw the greatest decline, falling from 74% market share in 2010 (11.4/15.5 cases) to only 36% market share in 2018 (1.6/4.3 cases). The market share of PTRA performed by radiologists grew from 12% market share in 2010 (1.9/15.5 cases) to 28% in 2018 (1.2/4.3 cases); despite this, the absolute number of PTRA performed by radiologists saw a smaller decline over this period (-34%; 1.9 to 1.2 cases). CONCLUSION: The total utilization rates of PTRA in the Medicare population has continued to decline from 2010 to 2018, likely due to clinical trials suggesting limited efficacy of angioplasty and stenting in the treatment of renovascular hypertension and other factors such as declining reimbursement. The overall and per-specialty rates continue to decline, reflecting an overarching trend away from procedural management of renovascular hypertension.

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.

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.

Association between Medicaid expansion status and lung cancer screening exam growth: findings from the ACR lung cancer registry.

PURPOSE: To determine if Medicaid expansion is associated with increased volumes of lung cancer screenings. METHODS: A quasi-experimental study was performed to compare the annual growth rates in lung cancer screenings between states that expanded Medicaid (n = 31) versus those that did not (n = 17). Using the American College of Radiology Lung Cancer Screening Registry, we calculated the average annual growth rate between 2016 and 2019 for both groups. Secondary analyses between these two groups also included calculations of the percentages of studies considered appropriate by USPSTF criteria. RESULTS: No significant difference was identified in the average annual growth in lung cancer screenings between Medicaid expanding and non-expanding states (57.6%, 50.3%, P = 0.51). No difference was observed in the percentage of studies considered appropriate (Medicaid expanding = 89.6%, non-expanding = 90.2%, P = 0.72). At baseline, there were socioeconomic differences between both groups of states. Medicaid expanding states had a more urban population (76.5% versus 67.9%, P = 0.05) and higher average incomes ($56,947, $49,876, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: No association is found between Medicaid expansion and increasing volumes of lung cancer screening exams. Although no data is available in the registry for screening exams before the implementation of Medicaid expansion (2014), most nationwide estimates of lung screening rates report a low baseline (<5%). Furthermore, despite being advantaged in other ways, such as with a more urban population or with higher incomes, the Medicaid expansion cohort does not demonstrate a higher growth rate. These findings suggest Medicaid expansion alone will not increase lung cancer screenings.

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.

Trends in the Use of Percutaneous Versus Open Surgical Breast Biopsy: An Update.

PURPOSE: Despite the emergence of core-needle (percutaneous) biopsy as the standard of breast care, open surgical breast biopsies continue to be performed with variable frequency. The aim of this study was to compare trends in the use of percutaneous and open surgical breast biopsies and the relative roles of radiologists and surgeons in performing them. METHODS: The nationwide Medicare Part B Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary Master Files for 2004 to 2016 were reviewed, and trends were studied in the total volume of breast biopsies performed in the Medicare fee-for-service population and in volumes of imaging-guided percutaneous biopsies (IGPBs) and open surgical biopsies. Using Medicare's physician specialty codes, the numbers of procedures performed by different specialties were determined. Trends in the type of imaging used for IGPBs were analyzed using the relevant Current Procedural Terminology codes, introduced in 2014. RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2016, utilization of IGPBs increased from 124,423 to 187,914 (+51%), whereas the use of open surgical breast biopsies declined from to 6,605 to 2,373 (-64%). IGPBs performed by radiologists increased from 89,493 to 160,485 (+79%), and IGPBs by surgeons declined from 30,264 to 24,703 (-18%). Among IGPBs from 2014 to 2016, ultrasound-guided and MRI-guided percutaneous biopsies increased, whereas stereotactic biopsies declined. CONCLUSIONS: There is a steady upward trend in the utilization of imaging-guided breast biopsies, and a majority are performed by radiologists. Ultrasound is the primary guidance technique used in percutaneous breast biopsies.

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.

Recent Trends in Medicare Reimbursements to Nonradiologist Physicians for In-Office MRI and CT.

PURPOSE: Previous studies demonstrated rapid growth in payments to nonradiologist providers (NRPs) for MRI and CT in their private offices. In this study, we re-examine the trends in these payments. METHODS: The nationwide Medicare Part B master files from 2004 to 2016 were accessed. They provide payment data for all Current Procedural Terminology codes. Codes for MRI and CT were selected. Global and technical component claims were counted. Medicare specialty codes identified payments made to NRPs and radiologists, and place-of-service codes identified payments directed to their private offices. RESULTS: Medicare MRI payments to NRPs peaked in 2006 at $247.7 million. As a result of the Deficit Reduction Act, there was a sharp drop to $189.5 million in 2007, eventually declining to $101.6 million by 2016 (-59% from peak in 2006). The NRP specialty groups with the highest payments for MRI ownership include orthopedists, neurologists, primary care physicians, and hospital-based specialists (pathology, physiatry, and hospitalists). Medicare CT payments to NRPs peaked in 2008 at $284.1 million and declined to $94.7 million in 2016 (-67% from peak). Cardiologists, primary care physicians, internal medicine specialists, urologists, and medical oncologists accounted for the most payments made to NRPs. Dollars paid to radiologists for private office MRI and CT dropped substantially since they peaked in 2006. CONCLUSIONS: NRP private offices (and radiology offices also) experienced massive decreases in Medicare payments for MRI and CT since peaking in 2006 and 2008, respectively. These trends suggest the financial viability of private office practice may be in jeopardy. However, certain recent policy changes could promote a resurgence.

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.

Recent Trends Suggest Possible Inappropriate Utilization of Myocardial Perfusion Imaging.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to analyze the utilization of elective stress nuclear myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) in the Medicare population. METHODS: Nationwide Medicare Part B fee-for-service databases for 2004 to 2016 were reviewed. Current Procedural Terminology codes for stress MPI were selected: standard planar and single-photon emission computed tomography (STD) and PET. Utilization rates per 1,000 Medicare beneficiaries were calculated. Elective examinations were identified using place-of-service codes for private offices and hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs). Medicare physician specialty codes identified the performing physician. Because Medicare Part B databases are complete population counts, sample statistics were not required. RESULTS: Elective STD MPI utilization peaked in 2006 at 74 studies/1,000 and had declined by 36% by 2016. Cardiologists' share of STD MPI grew from 79% to 87% between 2004 and 2016. Cardiologists perform STD MPI primarily in private offices, where utilization peaked in 2008 and then demonstrated an absolute decline of 28 studies/1,000 by 2016. During this same time period, cardiologists' use of STD MPI in HOPDs demonstrated an absolute increase of 8.1 studies/1,000. From 2004 to 2016, STD MPI use by radiologists declined by 58%. Elective PET MPI maintained an upward trend, reflecting increasing use by cardiologists in private offices. CONCLUSIONS: Elective STD MPI use is declining, but cardiologists are performing an increasing share in outpatient settings. The drop in private office STD MPI among cardiologists was far greater than the corresponding increase in its use in HOPDs, suggesting that many studies previously performed in private offices were unindicated. Self-referred PET MPI utilization has rapidly grown in cardiology private offices.

Coronary CT Angiography: Reversal of Earlier Utilization Trends.

PURPOSE: To assess recent trends in utilization of coronary CT angiography (CCTA), based upon place of service and provider specialty. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The nationwide Medicare Part B master files for 2006 through 2016 were the data source. Current Procedural Terminology, version 4 codes for CCTA were selected. The files provided procedure volume for each code. Utilization rates per 100,000 Medicare fee-for-service enrollees were then calculated. Medicare's place-of-service codes were used to identify CCTAs performed in private offices, hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs), emergency departments (EDs), and inpatient settings. Physician specialty codes were used to identify CCTAs interpreted by radiologists, cardiologists, and all other physicians as a group. Medicare practice share was defined as the percent of total Medicare utilization that was billed by each specialty. RESULTS: The total utilization rate of CCTA in the Medicare population rose sharply from 2006 to 2007, peaking at 210.3 per 100,000 enrollees in 2007. Radiologists' CCTA practice share in 2007 was 32%, compared with 60% for cardiologists. The overall utilization rate then declined to a nadir of 107.1 per 100,000 enrollees in 2013, but subsequently increased to 131.0 by 2016. By that year, radiologists' share of CCTA practice had risen to 58%, compared with 38% for cardiologists. HOPD utilization increased sharply since 2010, primarily among radiologists. In EDs and inpatient settings, greater utilization has also occurred recently, primarily among radiologists. By contrast, private office utilization has dropped sharply since 2007. CONCLUSION: After years of declining utilization, the utilization rate of CCTA is now increasing, predominantly among radiologists.

High-Deductible Health Plans and the Challenges They Pose to Radiologists.

Patients with high-deductible health plans will increasingly be motivated to contact their hospitals or various websites to try to obtain information about the costs of expensive services like advanced imaging. Unfortunately, they will not find price transparency but rather confusion and opaqueness. Hospital personnel and commercial websites often unwittingly provide erroneous pricing information. The reasons for this are explained. Detailed examples of the erroneous information are provided. State-mandated websites may be somewhat of an improvement, but their methodology seems to vary from state to state, and they too can be confusing. All this obviously creates problems for patients, who are left not knowing what their true costs will be. The situation also creates problems for radiologists and their hospitals. Because of misunderstandings that can occur during the information-gathering phase, the pricing information shown for many hospital facilities may be greatly inflated, placing them at a competitive disadvantage. Certain strategic solutions to the problems are available, and these are discussed.

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.

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.

The Percent Share of All Medicare Payments to Physicians That Is Attributable to Noninvasive Diagnostic Imaging.

PURPOSE: To ascertain the proportion of all Medicare payments to physicians under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) that is attributable to noninvasive diagnostic imaging (NDI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Medicare Part B Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary Master Files for 2003 to 2015 were the data source. Total approved payments to physicians for all medical services were determined each year. We then selected all procedure codes for NDI and determined aggregate approved payments to physicians for those codes. Also, Medicare's provider specialty codes were used to define payments to four provider categories: radiologists, cardiologists, all other physicians, and independent diagnostic testing facilities together with multispecialty groups (in this category, the specialty of the actual provider cannot be determined). RESULTS: Total Medicare-approved payments for all physician services under the PFS increased progressively from $92.73 billion in 2003 to $132.85 billion in 2015. In 2003, the share of those payments attributable to NDI was 9.5%, increasing to a peak of 10.8% in 2006, but then progressively declining to 6.0% in 2015. All four provider categories saw the same trend pattern-a peak in 2006 but then decline thereafter. By 2015, the shares of total PFS payments to physicians that were attributable to NDI were as follows: radiologists 3.2%, cardiologists 1.2%, all other physicians 1.2%, independent diagnostic testing facilities or multispecialty groups 0.4%. CONCLUSION: The proportion of Medicare PFS spending on physician services that is attributable to NDI has been declining in recent years and is now quite small.

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.

Comparative Trends in Utilization of MRI and Ultrasound to Evaluate Nonspine Joint Disease 2003 to 2015.

PURPOSE: MRI and ultrasound (US) are effective diagnostic tools to evaluate extremities. In this study, we analyze utilization trends in musculoskeletal (MSK) US and MRI from 2003 to 2015 within the Medicare population. METHODS: Our data sources were the Medicare Part B Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary Master Files for 2003 to 2015. They cover all Medicare fee-for-service enrollees (37.5 million in 2015). Current Procedural Terminology codes for nonvascular, nonspine joint MRI and extremity US were selected and volumes within these codes were determined. Medicare's physician specialty codes were used to identify provider specialty. We accounted for the 2011 code change that created both complete and limited US examinations. RESULTS: Total Medicare joint MRI volume increased from 738,509 in 2003 to 1,131,503 in 2015 (+53%), although there was little change after 2007. Radiologist MRI share in 2015 was 93%, followed by orthopedic surgeons at 5%. Total MSK US volume grew from 96,235 in 2003 to 429,695 in 2015 (+347%). Radiologists' market share of US decreased from 65% in 2003 to 37% in 2015, with nonradiologists now representing a majority of ultrasound examinations. Multiple nonradiology subspecialties also exceed radiology in volume of complete ultrasounds. CONCLUSION: The potential negative impact of MSK US on MSK MRI volume is likely overestimated because MRI volume has remained stable. MSK ultrasound is increasingly utilized outside radiology. If radiologists want to maintain their market share as MSK imaging leaders, more emphasis should be placed on increasing their involvement and expertise in MSK US.

The Recent Losses in Medicare Imaging Revenues Experienced by Radiologists, Cardiologists, and Other Physicians.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess recent trends in Medicare reimbursements to radiologists, cardiologists, and other physicians for noninvasive diagnostic imaging (NDI). METHODS: The Medicare Part B databases for 2002 to 2015 were the data source. These files provide total allowed payments for all NDI Current Procedural Terminology codes under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule. Medicare specialty codes were used to identify payments to radiologists, cardiologists, and all other specialists. In additional to total reimbursements, those made for global, technical component, and professional component claims were studied. RESULTS: Total reimbursements to physicians for NDI under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule peaked at $11.936 billion in 2006. Over the ensuing years, the Deficit Reduction Act and other cuts reduced them by 33% to $8.005 billion in 2015. Reimbursements to radiologists peaked at $5.300 billion in 2006 but dropped to $4.269 billion by 2015 (-19.5%). NDI reimbursements to cardiologists dropped from $2.998 billion in 2006 to $1.653 billion by 2015 (-44.9%). Most other specialties also saw decreases over the study period. An important reason for the large decline for cardiologists was their dependence on global reimbursement, which saw a 50.5% drop from 2006 to 2015. Radiologists' global payments also dropped sharply (40.4%), but radiologists themselves were somewhat protected by receiving a much larger proportion of their reimbursement for the professional component, which was not nearly as affected by Medicare payment reductions. CONCLUSIONS: The Deficit Reduction Act and other NDI payment cuts that followed have created huge savings for the Medicare program but have led to sharp reductions in payments received by radiologists, cardiologists, and other physicians for those services.