Nine Steps in the Entrepreneurial Journey for Academic Radiologists.

In this article, we explore the nine steps that we have found to be critical for success in our journeys in taking ideas in imaging to commercial products. These nine steps include 1) findings ideas that resonate, 2) protecting your intellectual property, 3) developing a great team that shares in the vision for the product, 4) building a low-fidelity prototype, 5) customer discovery to test your business hypothesis, 6) forming a company, 7) serving on a study section as a prelude to 8) seeking non-dilutive funding, and finally, 9) angel/venture funding.

Federal Out-of-Network Balance Billing Legislation: Context and Implications for Radiology Practices.

Out-of-network (OON) balance billing, commonly known as surprise billing but better described as a surprise gap in health insurance coverage, occurs when an individual with private health insurance (vs a public insurer such as Medicare) is administered unanticipated care from a physician who is not in their health plan's network. Such unexpected OON care may result in substantial out-of-pocket costs for patients. Although ending surprise billing is patient centric, patient protective, and noncontroversial, passing federal legislation was challenging given its ability to disrupt insurer-physician good-faith negotiations and thus impact in-network rates. Like past proposals, the recently passed No Surprises Act takes patients out of the middle of insurer-physician OON reimbursement disputes, limiting patients' expense to standard in-network cost-sharing amounts. The new law, based on arbitration, attempts to protect good-faith negotiations between physicians and insurance companies and encourages network contracting. Radiology practices, even those that are fully in network or that never practiced surprise billing, could nonetheless be affected. Ongoing rulemaking processes will have meaningful roles in determining how the law is made operational. Physician and stakeholder advocacy has been and will continue to be crucial to the ongoing evolution of this process. © RSNA, 2021.

Price Transparency in Radiology: Challenges and Opportunities to Improve.

Increasing health care consumerism has been proposed as a solution for rising U.S. health care costs. Although price transparency initiatives aim to inform patients about outof-pocket costs (OOPCs), challenges remain regarding price transparency tools, including limited accuracy of estimates, accounting for multiple payers for the same service, the need for quality measures, optimal OOPC delivery, and psychosocial consequences of OOPC information. As radiology practices consider implementing price transparency initiatives, improvements should address enhancing patients' experience with OOPC communication.

Peer Learning in Radiology: Effect of a Pay-for-Performance Initiative on Clinical Impact and Usage.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to assess the effects of a pay-for-performance (PFP) initiative on clinical impact and usage of a radiology peer learning tool. MATERIALS AND METHODS. This retrospective study was performed at a large academic hospital. On May 1, 2017, a peer learning tool was implemented to facilitate radiologist peer feedback including clinical follow-up, positive feedback, and consultation. Subsequently, PFP target numbers for peer learning tool alerts by subspecialty divisions (October 1, 2017) and individual radiologists (October 1, 2018) were set. The primary outcome was report addendum rate (percent of clinical follow-up alerts with addenda), which was a proxy for peer learning tool clinical impact. Secondary outcomes were peer learning tool usage rate (number of peer learning tool alerts per 1000 radiology reports) and proportion of clinical follow-up alerts (percent of clinical follow-ups among all peer learning tool alerts). Outcomes were assessed biweekly using ANOVA and statistical process control analyses. RESULTS. Among 1,265,839 radiology reports from May 1, 2017, to September 29, 2019, a total of 20,902 peer learning tool alerts were generated. The clinical follow-up alert addendum rate was not significantly different between the period before the PFP initiative (9.9%) and the periods including division-wide (8.3%) and individual (7.9%) PFP initiatives (p = .55; ANOVA). Peer learning tool usage increased from 2.2 alerts per 1000 reports before the PFP initiative to 12.6 per 1000 during the division-wide PFP period (5.7-fold increase; 12.6/2.2), to 25.2 in the individual PFP period (11.5-fold increase vs before PFP; twofold increase vs division-wide) (p < .001). The clinical follow-up alert proportion decreased from 37.5% before the PFP initiative, to 34.4% in the division-wide period, to 31.3% in the individual PFP period. CONCLUSION. A PFP initiative improved radiologist engagement in peer learning by marked increase in peer learning tool usage rate without a change in report addendum rate as a proxy for clinical impact.

The Need for an Ecologic Understanding of Radiology Practice.

OBJECTIVE. Many models have been used to understand radiology practice, including economics, engineering, and information technology. Each has advantages, but each also has drawbacks, failing to illuminate important aspects of radiologists' work. A model that offers additional insights is ecology. CONCLUSION. By looking at radiology practice through the ecologic concept of symbiosis, radiologists can gain new understanding and appreciation of aspects of their work that can render it more fruitful and sustainable.

Basics of time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) and applications in breast imaging.

Time-drive activity-based costing (TDABC) is a practical way of calculating costs, decreasing waste, and improving efficiency. Although TDABC has been utilized in other service industries for years, it has only recently gained attention in healthcare. In this review article, we define the basic concepts and steps of TDABC and provide examples for applications in breast imaging.

Special Report of the RSNA COVID-19 Task Force: The Short- and Long-term Financial Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Private Radiology Practices.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in widespread disruption to the global economy, including demand for imaging services. The resulting reduction in demand for imaging services had an abrupt and substantial impact on private radiology practices, which are heavily dependent on examination volumes for practice revenues. The goal of this report is to describe the specific experiences of radiologists working in various types of private radiology practices during the initial peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Herein, the authors describe factors determining the impact of the pandemic on private practices, the challenges these practices faced, the cost levers leaders adjusted, and the government subsidies sought. In addition, the authors describe adjustments practices are making to their mid- and long-term strategic plans to pivot for long-term success while managing the COVID-19 pandemic. Private practices have crafted tiered strategies to respond to the impact of the pandemic by pulling various cost levers to adjust service availability, staffing, compensation, benefits, time off, and expense reductions. In addition, they have sought additional revenues, within the boundaries of their practice, to mitigate ongoing financial losses. The longer term impact of the pandemic will alter existing practices, making some of them more likely than others to succeed in the years ahead. This report synthesizes the collective experience of private-practice radiologists shared with members of the Radiological Society of North America COVID-19 Task Force, including discussions with colleagues and leaders of private-practice radiology groups from across the United States.

Teaching Physician Supervision: Medicare's Ongoing Imperative for Academic Radiologists.

OBJECTIVE. Medicare permits radiologists to bill for trainee work but only in narrowly defined circumstances and with considerable consequences for noncompliance. The purpose of this article is to introduce relevant policy rationale and definitions, review payment requirements, outline documentation and operational considerations for diagnostic and interventional radiology services, and offer practical suggestions for academic radiologists striving to optimize regulatory compliance. CONCLUSION. As academic radiology departments advance their missions of service, teaching, and scholarship, most rely on residents and fellows to support expanding clinical demands. Given the risks of technical noncompliance, institutional commitment and ongoing education regarding teaching supervision compliance are warranted.

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.

Initial Impact of COVID-19 on Radiology Practices: An ACR/RBMA Survey.

PURPOSE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic affected radiology practices in many ways. The aim of this survey was to estimate declines in imaging volumes and financial impact across different practice settings during April 2020. METHODS: The survey, comprising 48 questions, was conducted among members of the ACR and the Radiology Business Management Association during May 2020. Survey questions focused on practice demographics, volumes, financials, personnel and staff adjustments, and anticipation of recovery. RESULTS: During April 2020, nearly all radiology practices reported substantial (56.4%-63.7%) declines in imaging volumes, with outpatient imaging volumes most severely affected. Mean gross charges declined by 50.1% to 54.8% and collections declined by 46.4% to 53.9%. Percentage reductions did not correlate with practice size. The majority of respondents believed that volumes would recover but not entirely (62%-88%) and anticipated a short-term recovery, with a surge likely in the short term due to postponement of elective imaging (52%-64%). About 16% of respondents reported that radiologists in their practices tested positive for COVID-19. More than half (52.3%) reported that availability of personal protective equipment had become an issue or was inadequate. A majority (62.3%) reported that their practices had existing remote reading or teleradiology capabilities in place before the pandemic, and 22.3% developed such capabilities in response to the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Radiology practices across different settings experienced substantial declines in imaging volumes and collections during the initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in April 2020. Most are actively engaged in both short- and long-term operational adjustments.

State variation in Medicaid and Medicare reimbursements in musculoskeletal radiology.

BACKGROUND: Medicaid reimbursements for physician services are determined by each state. However, how these reimbursements vary between states, and how these reimbursements vary in comparison to Medicare reimbursements is unknown for musculoskeletal radiology studies. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the variability in Medicaid and Medicare physician reimbursements for musculoskeletal imaging studies between states. METHODS: We evaluated the Medicare and Medicaid physician reimbursements for the most commonly performed musculoskeletal radiology studies (15 radiographs and 10 MRIs) based on Medicare's 2017 National Summary Data File. Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements for these studies were compared by dollar difference (difference in reimbursement in dollars between Medicare and Medicaid). State-wide variability in these reimbursements was quantified by the coefficient of variation (COV) and by the dollar difference in reimbursement amounts. Medicaid and Medicare reimbursement rates were compared using a paired t-test, since the data was paired by state. RESULTS: The mean Medicaid reimbursement rates were lower for musculoskeletal radiographs (p < 0.05) but higher for musculoskeletal MRI studies than the Medicare rates (p < 0.05). As hypothesized, there was variation in both Medicare and Medicaid imaging reimbursements between states, however, the variation was substantially higher for Medicaid reimbursements. We found the Medicare reimbursement COV between states was 0.07 for all imaging studies, whereas the Medicaid reimbursement COV between states varied from 0.23 to 0.55 for radiographs and from 0.31 to 0.45 for MRIs. DISCUSSION: The data show that there is mild, but constant variation across imaging studies in Medicare reimbursement for musculoskeletal imaging studies between states. However, there is more variation in the Medicaid reimbursements across imaging studies and between states. More appropriate reimbursement may increase access to care for Medicaid patients.

The Economic Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Radiology Practices.

The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic will have a profound impact on radiology practices across the country. Policy measures adopted to slow the transmission of disease are decreasing the demand for imaging independent of COVID-19. Hospital preparations to expand crisis capacity are further diminishing the amount of appropriate medical imaging that can be safely performed. Although economic recessions generally tend to result in decreased health care expenditures, radiology groups have never experienced an economic shock that is simultaneously exacerbated by the need to restrict the availability of imaging. Outpatient-heavy practices will feel the biggest impact of these changes, but all imaging volumes will decrease. Anecdotal experience suggests that radiology practices should anticipate 50%-70% decreases in imaging volume that will last a minimum of 3-4 months, depending on the location of practice and the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic in each region. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security, or CARES, Act provides multiple means of direct and indirect aid to health care providers and small businesses. The final allocation of this funding is not yet clear, and it is likely that additional congressional action will be necessary to stabilize health care markets. Administrators and practice leaders must be proactive with practice modifications and financial maneuvers that can position them to emerge from this pandemic in the most viable economic position. It is possible that this crisis will have lasting effects on the structure of the radiology field.

Key financial indicators and ratios: How to use them for success in your practice.

Accounting and finance are not typically a core educational offering in medical education. However, for physician leaders and leaders-in-grooming, it is prudent to be familiar with key financial indicators and ratios. The purpose of this review article is to provide fundamental information for emerging radiology physician leaders by describing important financial indicators and ratios, how they are defined and calculated, and, most importantly, how they can be interpreted and utilized for improving practice performance. SUMMARY SENTENCE: Understanding and implementing key financial ratios and indicators is important to maintain and improve financial performance in radiology practices.

The Energy Consumption of Radiology: Energy- and Cost-saving Opportunities for CT and MRI Operation.

Background Awareness of energy efficiency has been rising in the industrial and residential sectors but only recently in the health care sector. Purpose To measure the energy consumption of modern CT and MRI scanners in a university hospital radiology department and to estimate energy- and cost-saving potential during clinical operation. Materials and Methods Three CT scanners, four MRI scanners, and cooling systems were equipped with kilowatt-hour energy measurement sensors (2-Hz sampling rate). Energy measurements, the scanners' log files, and the radiology information system from the entire year 2015 were analyzed and segmented into scan modes, as follows: net scan (actual imaging), active (room time), idle, and system-on and system-off states (no standby mode was available). Per-examination and peak energy consumption were calculated. Results The aggregated energy consumption imaging 40 276 patients amounted to 614 825 kWh, dedicated cooling systems to 492 624 kWh, representing 44.5% of the combined consumption of 1 107 450 kWh (at a cost of U.S. $199 341). This is equivalent to the usage in a town of 852 people and constituted 4.0% of the total yearly energy consumption at the authors' hospital. Mean consumption per CT examination over 1 year was 1.2 kWh, with a mean energy cost (±standard deviation) of $0.22 ± 0.13. The total energy consumption of one CT scanner for 1 year was 26 226 kWh ($4721 in energy cost). The net consumption per CT examination over 1 year was 3580 kWh, which is comparable to the usage of a two-person household in Switzerland; however, idle state consumption was fourfold that of net consumption (14 289 kWh). Mean MRI consumption over 1 year was 19.9 kWh per examination, with a mean energy cost of $3.57 ± 0.96. The mean consumption for a year in the system-on state was 82 174 kWh per MRI examination and 134 037 kWh for total consumption, for an energy cost of $24 127. Conclusion CT and MRI energy consumption is substantial. Considerable energy- and cost-saving potential is present during nonproductive idle and system-off modes, and this realization could decrease total cost of ownership while increasing energy efficiency. © RSNA, 2020.

Optimising patient care in medical radiation services through health economics: an introduction.

The role of health economics in optimising patient care in medical radiation clinical settings is of increasing importance in ensuring efficient and effective service delivery. This commentary introduces health economics to medical radiation professionals by outlining the main analysis types utilised, highlighted by examples in the literature. The purpose is to provide an over-arching framework and starting point for incorporating health economics into medical radiation research study protocols.