Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
National Trends in Oncologic Diagnostic Imaging.
Rosenkrantz, Andrew B; Chaves Cerdas, Laura; Hughes, Danny R; Recht, Michael P; Nass, Sharyl J; Hricak, Hedvig.
Afiliação
  • Rosenkrantz AB; Section chief, Abdominal Imaging, Director of Health Policy, and Director of Prostate Imaging, Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, New York.
  • Chaves Cerdas L; Harvey L. Neiman Health Policy Institute, Reston, Virginia.
  • Hughes DR; Harvey L. Neiman Health Policy Institute, Reston, Virginia; Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia; Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
  • Recht MP; Chairman, Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, New York.
  • Nass SJ; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Washington, DC.
  • Hricak H; Chair, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. Electronic address: hricakh@mskcc.org.
J Am Coll Radiol ; 17(9): 1116-1122, 2020 Sep.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32640248
OBJECTIVE: To characterize national trends in oncologic imaging (OI) utilization. METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional study used 2004 and 2016 CMS 5% Carrier Claims Research Identifiable Files. Radiologist-performed, primary noninvasive diagnostic imaging examinations were identified from billed Current Procedural Terminology codes; CT, MRI, and PET/CT examinations were categorized as "advanced" imaging. OI examinations were identified from imaging claims' primary International Classification of Diseases-9 and International Classification of Diseases-10 codes. Imaging services were stratified by academic practice status and place of service. State-level correlations of oncologic advanced imaging utilization (examinations per 1,000 beneficiaries) with cancer prevalence and radiologist supply were assessed by Spearman correlation coefficient. RESULTS: The national Medicare sample included 5,051,095 diagnostic imaging examinations (1,220,224 of them advanced) in 2004 and 5,023,115 diagnostic imaging examinations (1,504,608 of them advanced) in 2016. In 2004 and 2016, OI represented 4.3% and 3.9%, respectively, of all imaging versus 10.8% and 9.5%, respectively, of advanced imaging. The percentage of advanced OI done in academic practices rose from 18.8% in 2004 to 34.1% in 2016, leaving 65.9% outside academia. In 2016, 58.0% of advanced OI was performed in the hospital outpatient setting and 23.9% in the physician office setting. In 2016, state-level oncologic advanced imaging utilization correlated with state-level radiologist supply (r = +0.489, P < .001) but not with state-level cancer prevalence (r = -0.139, P = .329). DISCUSSION: OI usage varied between practice settings. Although the percentage of advanced OI done in academic settings nearly doubled from 2004 to 2016, the majority remained in nonacademic practices. State-level oncologic advanced imaging utilization correlated with radiologist supply but not cancer prevalence.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Medicare / Tomografia por Emissão de Pósitrons combinada à Tomografia Computadorizada Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Risk_factors_studies País como assunto: America do norte Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Medicare / Tomografia por Emissão de Pósitrons combinada à Tomografia Computadorizada Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Risk_factors_studies País como assunto: America do norte Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article