An Overview of the Radiation Oncology Alternative Payment Model and Impact on Practices Serving Vulnerable Populations.

Radiation oncology reimbursement methodology has been largely unchanged over the past 30 years, and new approaches are of great interest to practicing radiation oncologists and other health care stakeholders. Traditional radiation oncology reimbursement is based on a series of individual codes for evaluation and management (professional) and technical services, yielding a complex reimbursement system. In an attempt to move toward a simpler, episodic payment model, bundling all of the codes into a single payment, an alternative payment model for radiation oncology was developed. The radiation oncology alternative payment model is a revolutionary change in how radiation oncologic services will be reimbursed and has potential to affect all aspects of radiation oncologic care. Here, the authors review the origin of the currently proposed radiation oncology model and discuss potential implications of this model on the provision of care, especially as it relates to rural practices and other underserved and vulnerable patient populations.

Breast Imaging Radiologists' Role in Value Pathways.

The Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) has fallen short of its intended goal to substantially transform the delivery of healthcare by tying clinician payments to quality and cost reduction. Policy makers made changes to the program over its first five years in efforts to address concerns about complexity and lack of meaningful impact on outcomes for our patients. One of these changes, the creation of MIPS Value Pathways (MVPs), aims to streamline reporting of increasingly aligned measures and serve as a stepping-stone for the transition to alternative payment models. As MIPS continues to evolve, these value pathways will provide new opportunities for breast imaging radiologists to participate in value-based care.

Characteristics of COVID-19 Community Practice Declines in Noninvasive Diagnostic Imaging Professional Work.

PURPOSE: The operational and financial impact of the widespread coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) curtailment of imaging services on radiology practices is unknown. We aimed to characterize recent COVID-19-related community practice noninvasive diagnostic imaging professional work declines. METHODS: Using imaging metadata from nine community radiology practices across the United States between January 2019 and May 2020, we mapped work relative value unit (wRVU)-weighted stand-alone noninvasive diagnostic imaging service codes to both modality and body region. Weekly 2020 versus 2019 wRVU changes were analyzed by modality, body region, and site of service. Practice share χ2 testing was performed. RESULTS: Aggregate weekly wRVUs ranged from a high of 120,450 (February 2020) to a low of 55,188 (April 2020). During that -52% wRVU nadir, outpatient declines were greatest (-66%). All practices followed similar aggregate trends in the distribution of wRVUs between each 2020 versus 2019 week (P = .96-.98). As a percentage of total all-practice wRVUs, declines in CT (20,046 of 63,992; 31%) and radiography and fluoroscopy (19,196; 30%) were greatest. By body region, declines in abdomen and pelvis (16,203; 25%) and breast (12,032; 19%) imaging were greatest. Mammography (-17%) and abdominal and pelvic CT (-14%) accounted for the largest shares of total all-practice wRVU reductions. Across modality-region groups, declines were far greatest for mammography (-92%). CONCLUSIONS: Substantial COVID-19-related diagnostic imaging work declines were similar across community practices and disproportionately impacted mammography. Decline patterns could facilitate pandemic second wave planning. Overall implications for practice workflows, practice finances, patient access, and payment policy are manifold.

The Alternative Payment Model Pathway to Radiologists' Success in the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System.

PURPOSE: To assess radiologists' performance in the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS), with attention to the impact of the novel MIPS-Alternative Payment Models (APMs) participation option created under the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act. METHODS: Data regarding radiologists' 2017 MIPS performance was extracted from the Physician Compare 2017 Individual EC Public Reporting-overall MIPS Performance data set, and additional physician characteristics were extracted from multiple CMS data sets. RESULTS: Among 20,956 MIPS-participating radiologists, 16.6% participated using individual reporting, 68.9% group reporting, and 13.4% APM reporting. Average Quality scores were 59.7 84.0, and 92.5, respectively. The fractions of radiologists scored in Advancing Care Information were 4.1%, 27.0%, and 100.0%. When scored, average scores in this category were 61.9, 94.6, and 80.9. A total of 27.7% and 42.7% of interventional radiologists were scored in this category using individual and group reporting, respectively. However, general radiologists and subspecialists other than interventional radiologists were rarely (<5%) scored. Average scores in Improvement Activities were 37.5, 92.5, and 100.0 for individual reporting, group reporting, and APM reporting, respectively. Average Final Scores were 56.5, 85.6, and 90.6. The better performance of APM versus group reporting was most apparent for smaller practices (ie, for practice sizes ≤15, average Final Score of 84.1 for APM versus 75.0 for group reporting). CONCLUSION: Although radiologists perform much better in MIPS using group versus individual reporting, performance improves even further through APM reporting, particularly for smaller practices. Radiologists seeking better performance under MIPS should carefully explore APM opportunities.

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Implementation: Considerations for Emerging Breast Cancer Screening Bundled Payment Models.

PURPOSE: Bundled payments have been touted as mechanisms to optimize quality and costs. A recent feasibility study evaluating bundled payments for screening mammography episodes predated widespread adoption of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT). We explore a similar model reflecting emerging acceptance of DBT in breast cancer screening. METHODS: Using 4-year data for 59,094 screening episodes from two large facilities within a large academic health system, we utilized published methodology to calibrate Medicare national allowable reference prices for women undergoing screening mammography before and after practice-wide implementation of DBT. RESULTS: Excluding DBT, Medicare-normalized bundled prices for traditional breast imaging 364 days downstream to screening mammography are extremely similar pre- and post-DBT implementation ($182.86 in 2013; $182.68 in 2015). The addition of DBT increased a DBT-inclusive bundled price by $53.16 (an amount lower than the $56.13 Medicare allowable fee for screening DBT) but was associated with significantly reduced recall rates (13.0% versus 9.4%; P < .0001). Without or with DBT, screening episode bundled prices remained sensitive to bundle-included services and varied little by patient age, race, or insurance status. CONCLUSIONS: Prior non-DBT approaches to bundled payment models for breast cancer screening remain viable as DBT becomes the standard of care, with bundle prices varying little by patient age, race, or insurance status. Higher DBT-inclusive bundled prices, however, highlight the need to explore societal costs more broadly (eg, reduced time away from work from fewer recalls) as bundled payment models evolve.

Imaging of the elbow in children with wrist fracture: an unnecessary source of radiation and use of resources?

BACKGROUND: Anecdotally accepted practice for evaluation of children with clinically suspected or radiographically proven wrist fracture in many urgent care and primary care settings is concurrent imaging of the forearm and elbow, despite the lack of evidence to support additional images. These additional radiographs may be an unnecessary source of radiation and use of health care resources. OBJECTIVE: Our study assesses the necessity of additional radiographs of the forearm and elbow in children with wrist injury. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed electronic medical records of children 17 and younger in whom wrist fracture was diagnosed in the emergency department. We identified the frequency with which additional radiographs of the proximal forearm and distal humerus demonstrated another site of acute injury. RESULTS: We identified 214 children with wrist fracture. Of those, 129 received additional radiographs of the elbow. Physical examination findings proximal to the wrist were documented in only 16 (12%) of these 129 children. A second injury proximal to the wrist fracture was present in 4 (3%) of these 129 children, all of whom exhibited physical examination findings at the elbow. No fractures were documented in children with a negative physical examination of the elbow. CONCLUSION: Although elbow fractures occasionally complicate distal forearm fractures in children, our findings indicate that a careful physical evaluation of the elbow is sufficient to guide further radiographic investigation. Routine radiographs of both the wrist and elbow in children with distal forearm fracture appear to be unnecessary when an appropriate physical examination is performed.

Tracheobronchial calcifications in children.

BACKGROUND: Tracheobronchial calcifications are considered a rare radiologic finding in children. Our clinical experience indicates that this finding is not infrequently seen among children with prosthetic heart valves who have been treated with warfarin sodium. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that calcifications of the tracheobronchial tree are more common than previously reported in this patient population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed the medical records and imaging studies of children who underwent cardiac valve replacement at our institution to estimate the prevalence. RESULTS: Tracheobronchial calcifications were identified on chest radiographs in 6 out of 17 children (35%), indicating that this imaging finding might be frequently overlooked. CONCLUSION: All children positive for tracheobronchial calcifications had been anticoagulated with warfarin sodium between the time of surgery and development of positive imaging findings. Our findings suggest that tracheobronchial calcifications are not uncommon in children treated with warfarin. Further investigation is necessary to determine wether there is a cause-effect relationship in these children.