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 Percutaneous Embolization Procedures by Radiologists and Other Specialists.

PURPOSE: To evaluate utilization trends in percutaneous embolization among radiologists and nonradiologist providers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The nationwide Medicare Part B fee-for-service databases for 2005-2016 were used to evaluate percutaneous embolization codes. Six codes describing embolization procedures were reviewed. Physician providers were grouped as radiologists, vascular surgeons, cardiologists, nephrologists, other surgeons, and all others. RESULTS: The total volume of Medicare percutaneous embolization procedures increased from 20,262 in 2005 to 45,478 in 2016 (+125%). Radiologists performed 13,872 procedures in 2005 (68% of total volume) and 33,254 in 2016 (73% of total volume), a 140% increase in volume. While other specialists also increased the number of cases performed from 2005 to 2016, radiologists strongly predominated, performing 87% of arterial and 30% of venous procedures in 2016, more than any other single specialty. In 2014 and 2015, a sharp increase in venous embolization cases performed by nonradiologists preceded a sharp decrease in 2016, likely the result of complicated billing codes for venous procedures. Radiologists maintained a steady upward trend in the number of cases they performed during those years. CONCLUSIONS: The volume of percutaneous embolization procedures performed in the Medicare population increased from 2005 to 2016, reflecting a trend toward minimally invasive intervention. In 2016, radiologists performed nearly 10 times more arterial embolization procedures than the second highest specialty and more venous embolization procedures than any other single specialty.

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.

The Increasing Use of Emergency Department Imaging in the United States: Is It Appropriate?

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to study trends in utilization of imaging in emergency departments (ED) in relation to trends in ED visits and the specialties of the interpreting physicians. MATERIALS AND METHODS. This study was conducted with Medicare Part B Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary Master Files for 2004-2016 and Health Care Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) data from 2006 to 2014. Yearly utilization was calculated per 1000 Medicare beneficiaries for different noninvasive imaging modalities performed during ED visits, and the specialties of the physicians making the interpretations were recorded. The number of ED visits by Medicare patients was obtained from the HCUP. RESULTS. The number of ED visits by Medicare fee-for-service patients increased 8.0% (from 20.0 million in 2006 to 21.6 million in 2014), and the total number of associated ED imaging examinations increased 38.4% (14.6 million to 20.2 million). The number of imaging examinations per ED visit was 0.73 in 2006, increasing to 0.94 by 2014. Utilization trends per 1000 Medicare fee-for-service enrollees in the ED for the major modalities were as follows: CT +153.0% (77.8 in 2004 to 196.7 in 2016), noncardiac ultrasound +134% (11.2 in 2004 to 26.2 in 2016), and radiography +30% (259 in 2004 to 336 in 2016). Utilization of MRI and nuclear medicine was very low. In 2016, radiologists interpreted 99.5% (CT), 99.2% (MRI), 98.0% (radiography), 87.6% (ultrasound), and 94.5% (nuclear medicine) of imaging examinations. CONCLUSION. Utilization of imaging in EDs is increasing not only in the Medicare population but also per ED visit. Radiologists strongly predominate in interpreting examinations in all modalities.

Neurointerventional Radiology for the Aspiring Radiology Resident: Current State of the Field and Future Directions.

OBJECTIVE: The purposes of this study were to document recent trends in stroke intervention at a tertiary-care facility with a comprehensive stroke center and to analyze current procedure volumes and the employment of specialty providers in neurointerventional radiology (NIR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional trends in the volume of mechanical thrombectomy were analyzed on the basis of the number of patients who underwent mechanical thrombectomy from 2013 to 2017. To evaluate the current status of mechanical thrombectomy volumes in the United States, the number of patients in the Medicare fee-for-service database who underwent mechanical thrombectomy in 2016 was assessed. The specialty backgrounds of the various providers who performed mechanical thrombectomy were analyzed. Procedure volumes for intracranial stenting, embolization, and vertebral augmentation procedures were assessed. RESULTS: From 2013 to 2017, the total numbers of mechanical thrombectomy procedures for acute ischemic stroke were 19 in 2013 and 111 in 2017. The total volume of mechanical thrombectomy procedures in the Medicare fee-for-service population in 2016 was 7479. For intracranial endovascular procedures, 20,850 were performed in the U.S. Medicare population in 2015 and 22,511 in 2016. Radiologists performed 45% of procedures in 2016; neurosurgeons, 41%; and neurologists, 11%. When the total numbers of percutaneous brain and spine procedures were combined, radiologists performed 41%; neurosurgeons, 23%; and neurologists, 3%. In 2016, there were a total of 220 active NIR staff at the NIR programs with rotating residents or fellows. In these programs, 49% of staff members were neuroradiologists, 41% were neurosurgeons, and 10% were neurologists. Of the 72 NIR departments with confirmed rotating fellows or residents, 14 had only neuroradiologists on staff, six had only neurosurgeons, and one had only neurologists. CONCLUSION: Increasing radiology resident interest and participation in NIR should ensure a steady influx of radiologists into the field, continuing the strong tradition of radiology participation, leadership, and innovation in NIR.

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.

Cardiac risk factors and risk scores vs cardiac computed tomography angiography: a prospective cohort study for triage of ED patients with acute chest pain.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study is to evaluate cardiac risk factors and risk scores for prediction of coronary artery disease (CAD) and adverse outcomes in an emergency department (ED) population judged to be at low to intermediate risk for acute coronary syndrome. METHODS: Informed consent was obtained from consecutive ED patients who presented with chest pain and were evaluated with coronary computed tomography angiography (cCTA). Cardiac risk factors, clinical presentation, electrocardiogram, and laboratory studies were recorded; the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) and Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) scores were tabulated. Coronary computed tomography angiography findings were rated on a 6-level plaque burden scale and classified for significant CAD (stenosis ≥50%). Adverse cardiovascular outcomes were recorded at 30 days. RESULTS: Among 250 patients evaluated by cCTA, 143 (57%) had no CAD, 64 (26%) demonstrated minimal plaque (<30% stenosis), 26 (10%) demonstrated mild plaque (<50% stenosis), 9 (4%) demonstrated moderate single vessel disease (50%-70% stenosis), 2 (1%) demonstrated moderate multivessel disease, and 6 (2%) demonstrated severe disease (>70% stenosis). Six patients developed adverse cardiovascular outcomes. Among traditional cardiac risk factors, only age (older) and sex (male) were significant independent predictors of CAD. Correlation with CAD was poor for the TIMI (r = 0.12) and GRACE (r = 0.09-0.23) scores. The TIMI and GRACE scores were not useful to predict adverse outcomes. Coronary computed tomography angiography identified severe CAD in all subjects with adverse outcomes. CONCLUSION: Among ED patients who present with chest pain judged to be at low to intermediate risk for acute coronary syndrome, traditional risk factors are not useful to stratify risk for CAD and adverse outcomes. Coronary computed tomography angiography is an excellent predictor of CAD and outcome.