Intersocietal Accreditation Commission Accreditation Status of Outpatient Cerebrovascular Testing Facilities Among Medicare Beneficiaries: The VALUE Study.

OBJECTIVES: Accreditation of cerebrovascular ultrasound laboratories by the Intersocietal Accreditation Commission (IAC) and equivalent organizations is supported by the Joint Commission certification of stroke centers. Limited information exists on the accreditation status and geographic distribution of cerebrovascular testing facilities in the United States. Our study objectives were to identify the proportion of IAC-accredited outpatient cerebrovascular testing facilities used by Medicare beneficiaries, describe their geographic distribution, and identify variations in cerebrovascular testing procedure types and volumes by accreditation status. METHODS: As part of the VALUE (Vascular Accreditation, Location, and Utilization Evaluation) Study, we examined the proportion of IAC-accredited facilities that conducted cerebrovascular testing in a 5% Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services random Outpatient Limited Data Set in 2011 and investigated their geographic distribution using geocoding. RESULTS: Among 7327 outpatient facilities billing Medicare for cerebrovascular testing, only 22% (1640) were IAC accredited. The proportion of IAC-accredited cerebrovascular testing facilities varied by region (χ(2)[3] = 177.1; P < .0001), with 29%, 15%, 13%, and 10% located in the Northeast, South, Midwest, and West, respectively. However, of the total number of cerebrovascular outpatient procedures conducted in 2011 (38,555), 40% (15,410) were conducted in IAC-accredited facilities. Most cerebrovascular testing procedures were carotid duplex, with 40% of them conducted in IAC-accredited facilities. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of facilities conducting outpatient cerebrovascular testing accredited by the IAC is low and varies by region. The growing number of certified stroke centers should be accompanied by more accredited outpatient vascular testing facilities, which could potentially improve the quality of stroke care.

How Do Noninvasive Imaging Facilities Perceive the Accreditation Process? Results of an Intersocietal Accreditation Commission Survey.

The Intersocietal Accreditation Commission (IAC) accredits vascular, echocardiography, nuclear medicine, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging laboratories. How facilities involved in the accreditation process view accreditation is unknown. The objective of this study was to examine the perception of laboratory accreditation from those who had undergone the process. An electronic survey request was sent to all facilities that had received IAC accreditation at least once. Demographic information, as well as opinions on the perceived value of accreditation as it relates to 15 quality metrics was acquired. Responses were obtained from 2782 facilities. Of the 15 quality metrics examined, the process was perceived as leading to improvements by a majority of respondents for 10 (67%) metrics including: report standardization, adherence to guidelines, test standardization, report completeness, identification of deficiencies, improved staff knowledge, report timeliness, distinguished facility, correction of deficiencies, and image quality. Overall, the perceived improvement was greater for hospital-based facilities (global 66% vs 59%; P < 0.001). Survey data demonstrate that the accreditation process has a positive perceived impact on the majority of examined metrics. These findings suggest that those undergoing the process find value in accreditation.

Facility perception of nuclear cardiology accreditation: Results of an Intersocietal Accreditation Commission (IAC) survey.

BACKGROUND: The Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act requires accreditation for all non-hospital suppliers of nuclear cardiology, nuclear medicine, and positron emission tomography (PET) studies as a condition of reimbursement. The perceptions of these facilities regarding the value and impact of the accreditation process are unknown. We conducted an electronic survey to assess the value of nuclear cardiology accreditation. METHODS: A request to participate in an electronic survey was sent to the medical and technical directors (n = 5,721) of all facilities who had received Intersocietal Accreditation Commission (IAC) Nuclear/PET accreditation. Demographic information, as well as, opinions on the value of accreditation as it relates to 16 quality metrics was obtained. RESULTS: There were 664 (11.6%) respondents familiar with the accreditation process of which 26% were hospital-based and 74% were nonhospital-based. Of the quality metrics examined, the process was perceived as leading to improvements by a majority of all respondents for 10 (59%) metrics including report standardization, report completeness, guideline adherence, deficiency identification, report timeliness, staff knowledge, facility distinction, deficiency correction, acquisition standardization, and image quality. Overall, the global perceived improvement was greater for hospital-based facilities (63% vs 57%; P < .001). Ninety-five percent of respondents felt that accreditation was important. Hospital-based facilities were more likely to feel that accreditation demonstrates a commitment to quality (43% vs 33%, P = .029), while nonhospital-based facilities were more likely to feel accreditation is important for reimbursement (50% vs 29%, P≤ .001). CONCLUSION: Although the accreditation process is demanding, the results of the IAC survey indicate that the accreditation process has a positive perceived impact for the majority of examined quality metrics, suggesting the facilities find the process to be valuable.

Accreditation status and geographic location of outpatient vascular testing facilities among Medicare beneficiaries: the VALUE (Vascular Accreditation, Location & Utilization Evaluation) study.

OBJECTIVE: There is limited information on the accreditation status and geographic distribution of vascular testing facilities in the US. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) provide reimbursement to facilities regardless of accreditation status. The aims were to: (1) identify the proportion of Intersocietal Accreditation Commission (IAC) accredited vascular testing facilities in a 5% random national sample of Medicare beneficiaries receiving outpatient vascular testing services; (2) describe the geographic distribution of these facilities. METHODS: The VALUE (Vascular Accreditation, Location & Utilization Evaluation) Study examines the proportion of IAC accredited facilities providing vascular testing procedures nationally, and the geographic distribution and utilization of these facilities. The data set containing all facilities that billed Medicare for outpatient vascular testing services in 2011 (5% CMS Outpatient Limited Data Set (LDS) file) was examined, and locations of outpatient vascular testing facilities were obtained from the 2011 CMS/Medicare Provider of Services (POS) file. RESULTS: Of 13,462 total vascular testing facilities billing Medicare for vascular testing procedures in a 5% random Outpatient LDS for the US in 2011, 13% (n=1730) of facilities were IAC accredited. The percentage of IAC accredited vascular testing facilities in the LDS file varied significantly by US region, p<0.0001: 26%, 12%, 11%, and 7% for the Northeast, South, Midwest, and Western regions, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that the proportion of outpatient vascular testing facilities that are IAC accredited is low and varies by region. Increasing the number of accredited vascular testing facilities to improve test quality is a hypothesis that should be tested in future research.

Accreditation for cardiovascular imaging: setting quality standards for patient care.

The accreditation of laboratories performing noninvasive cardiac procedures is now routinely available and often required by insurance companies. In this article, the history of the accreditation for cardiac procedures is reviewed, the process explained, and the number of accredited laboratories listed. Decision pathways are listed, and common reasons for a laboratory being delayed in approval are described specific for the various modalities. Some of the common compliments and concerns received by the Intersocietal Accreditation Commission are described.

Fundamentals of ICANL accreditation.

The Intersocietal Commission for the Accreditation of Nuclear Medicine Laboratories (ICANL) has become a nationally recognized accreditation program with the primary goal of providing a multidisciplinary peer review program. The purpose of this paper is to review the structure and mission of the ICANL to help increase awareness of the importance of voluntary accreditation. Included is a broad review of the ICANL standards and their relationship to other nationally published standards and guidelines. A mandatory site visit is an integral part of the program, and specifics of the site visit are discussed along with a summary of the strengths and weaknesses of applicant laboratories. The benefits of voluntary accreditation will become clear as more facilities participate in the program.