Trends in Diagnostic Imaging Medicare Reimbursements: 2007 to 2019

PurposeThe aim of this study was to evaluate recent trends in Medicare reimbursement rates for various imaging studies.MethodsCommon diagnostic radiologic studies were selected across multiple imaging modalities: bone densitometry, CT, CT angiography, mammography, MR angiography, MRI, nuclear medicine, radiography, and ultrasound. The Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool from CMS was queried for Current Procedural Terminology codes to extract reimbursement data. All monetary data were adjusted for inflation to 2019 US dollars. The compound annual growth rate, average annual change, and total percentage change in reimbursement were calculated on the basis of these adjusted trends.ResultsInflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement for all imaging modalities decreased between 2007 and 2019. The greatest mean decrease in reimbursement rates was observed for MRI (−$52.08), and the largest decrease in total percentage change was seen for bone densitometry (−70.5%). Nuclear medicine demonstrated the smallest mean decreases in both annual change (−$0.32) and total percentage change (−4.28%).ConclusionsThis study examined Medicare reimbursements for radiologic studies from 2007 to 2019. After accounting for inflation, reimbursement rates were shown to decline for all studies across all imaging modalities except for individual studies in nuclear medicine, radiography, and ultrasound. Further investigation is encouraged to properly model future trends in reimbursement rates.     

Factors That Will Determine Future Utilization Trends in Diagnostic Imaging

Radiologists are facing uncertain times, and in this kind of environment, strategic planning is important but difficult. In particular, it is hard to know whether future imaging volume will increase, decrease, or stay approximately the same. In this article, the authors discuss a variety of factors that will influence imaging use in the coming years. Some factors will tend to increase imaging use, whereas others will tend to curtail it. Some of these factors will affect individual groups differently, depending on their locations and the circumstances of their practices. Radiologists would be well advised to become aware of and consider these factors as they go about their planning processes.     

National Trends in Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement and Retrieval Procedures in the Medicare Population Over Two Decades

PurposeTo assess trends in inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement and retrieval procedures in Medicare beneficiaries over the last two decades.MethodsUsing Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary Master Files from 1994 through 2015, we calculated utilization rates for IVC filter placement and retrieval procedures in Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. Services were stratified by provider specialty group and site of service.ResultsIVC filter placement rates increased from 1994 to 2008 (from 65.0 to 202.1 per 100,000 beneficiaries, compound annual growth rate [CAGR] +8.4%) and then decreased to 128.9 by 2015 (CAGR −6.2%). This decrease was observed across all specialty groups and sites of service. From 1994 to 2015, placement procedure market share increased for radiologists (from 45.1% to 62.7%) and cardiologists (from 2.5% to 6.7%) but decreased for surgeons (from 46.6% to 27.9%). Overall, procedures shifted slightly from the inpatient (from 94.5% to 86.5% of all procedures) to outpatient hospital (from 4.9% to 14.9%) settings. Between 2012 and 2015, retrieval rates increased from 12.0 to 17.7 (CAGR +13.9%). Retrievals as a percentage of placement procedures were similar across specialties in 2015 (range 13.0%-13.8%).ConclusionDespite prior dramatic growth, the utilization of IVC filters in Medicare beneficiaries markedly declined over the last decade, likely relating to evolving views regarding efficacy and long-term safety. This decline was accompanied by several filter-related market shifts, including increasing placement by radiologists and cardiologists, increasing outpatient placement procedures, and increasing retrieval rates.     

Lost to Follow-Up: A Nationwide Analysis of Patients With Transient Ischemic Attack Discharged From Emergency Departments With Incomplete Imaging

PurposeImaging guidelines for transient ischemic attack (TIA) recommend that patients undergo urgent brain and neurovascular imaging within 48 hours of symptom onset. Prior research suggests that most patients with TIA discharged from the emergency department (ED) do not complete recommended TIA imaging workup during their ED encounters. The purpose of this study was to determine the nationwide percentage of patients with TIA discharged from EDs with incomplete imaging workup who complete recommended imaging after discharge.MethodsPatients discharged from EDs with the diagnosis of TIA were identified from the Medicare 5% sample for 2017 and 2018 using International Classification of Diseases, tenth rev, Clinical Modification codes. Imaging performed was identified using Current Procedural Terminology codes. Incomplete imaging workup was defined as a TIA encounter without cross-sectional brain, brain-vascular, and neck-vascular imaging performed within the subsequent 30 days of the initial ED encounter. Patient- and hospital-level factors associated with incomplete TIA imaging were analyzed in a multivariable logistic regression.ResultsIn total, 6,346 consecutive TIA encounters were analyzed; 3,804 patients (59.9%) had complete TIA imaging workup during their ED encounters. Of the 2,542 patients discharged from EDs with incomplete imaging, 761 (29.9%) completed imaging during the subsequent 30 days after ED discharge. Among patients with TIA imaging workup completed after ED discharge, the median time to completion was 5 days. For patients discharged from EDs with incomplete imaging, the odds of incomplete TIA imaging at 30 days after discharge were highest for black (odds ratio, 1.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-2.66) and older (≥85 years of age; odds ratio, 2.41; 95% confidence interval, 1.78-3.26) patients. Reference values were age cohort 65 to 69 years; male gender; white race; no co-occurring diagnoses of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, or diabetes mellitus; household income > $63,029; hospital in the Northeast region; urban hospital location; hospital size > 400 beds; academically affiliated hospital; and facility with access to MRI.ConclusionsMost patients discharged from EDs with incomplete TIA imaging workup do not complete recommended imaging within 30 days after discharge.     

Changing Utilization Patterns of Cervical Spine Imaging in the Emergency Department: Perspectives From Two Decades of National Medicare Claims

PurposeThe aim of this study was to assess the changing use of emergency department (ED) cervical spine imaging in the Medicare population.MethodsUsing national aggregate Medicare claims data from 1994 through 2012, all cervical spine radiographic, CT, and MR examinations performed in the ED setting were identified. Shifts in modalities and providers and changes in utilization rates were studied.ResultsBetween 1994 and 2004, ED cervical spine radiography volumes in the Medicare fee-for-service population increased from 203,645 to 306,442 (+50.5%) and then declined to 152,755 (−50.2%) by 2012. CT volumes increased every year, overall by +8,864% from 1994 through 2012 (from 6,360 to 570,121). MR grew by +1,381%, but volumes overall were small (from 944 to 13,979). With these changes, CT overtook radiography as the dominant ED cervical spine imaging modality in 2007. Per 1,000 Medicare beneficiaries, utilization rates of radiography, CT, and MR changed by −27%, +8,682%, and +1,351% from 1994 through 2012 (from 6.3 to 4.6, from 0.2 to 17.3, and from 0.0 to 0.4). For all years, compared with other specialists, radiologists remained by far the dominant providers of radiography, CT, and MR (+91.7%, +93.4%, and +96.0% in 1994 and +96.9%, +99.3%, and +99.0% in 2012) in the ED setting.ConclusionsBetween 1994 and 2012, the overall utilization rate of cervical spine imaging for Medicare beneficiaries in the ED setting more than tripled. With a small decline in radiography (–27%) but a dramatic increase in CT (+8,864%), CT is now by far the dominant modality for imaging the cervical spine in the ED. Radiologists remain overwhelmingly the dominant providers of these interpretive services.     

Image Postprocessing Adoption Trends in Clinical Medical Imaging

There is an increased consensus in the medical and research community about the huge benefits quantitative imaging can bring to radiology. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, approximately 80 million CT and 34 million MRI scans are performed yearly in the United States alone, and the vast majority are currently evaluated through visual inspection. However, quantitative imaging can greatly reduce the burden on radiologists, by diminishing read time and improving diagnostic accuracy. This research was funded by the National Science Foundation’s I-Corps and Beat-the-Odds programs to interview more than 350 medical imaging professionals (clinicians, radiologists, policymakers, companies) around the world and determine current needs and trends in the use of postprocessing tools. Here the authors present a summary of these interviews for the adult and pediatric realms. The results indicate that clinical quantitative image analysis is increasingly popular and that we are at the cusp of a revolution in the field in terms of adoption.     

Utilization Trends in Diagnostic Imaging for a Commercially Insured Population: A Study of Massachusetts Residents 2009 to 2013

PurposeTo report utilization trends in diagnostic imaging among commercially insured Massachusetts residents from 2009 to 2013.Materials and MethodsCurrent Procedural Terminology codes were used to identify diagnostic imaging claims in the Massachusetts All-Payer Claims Database for the years 2009 to 2013. We reported utilization and spending annually by imaging modality using total claims, claims per 1,000 individuals, total expenditures, and average per claim payments.ResultsThe number of diagnostic imaging claims per insured MA resident increased only 0.6% from 2009 to 2013, whereas nonradiology claims increased by 6% annually. Overall diagnostic imaging expenditures, adjusted for inflation, were 27% lower in 2009 than 2013, compared with an 18% increase in nonimaging expenditures. Average payments per claim were lower in 2013 than 2009 for all modalities except nuclear medicine. Imaging procedure claims per 1,000 MA residents increased from 2009 to 2013 by 13% in MRI, from 147 to 166; by 17% in ultrasound, from 453 to 530; and by 12% in radiography (x-ray), from 985 to 1,100. However, CT claims per 1,000 fell by 37%, from 341 to 213, and nuclear medicine declined 57%, from 89 claims per 1,000 to 38.ConclusionDiagnostic imaging utilization exhibited negligible growth over the study period. Diagnostic imaging expenditures declined, largely the result of falling payments per claim in most imaging modalities, in contrast with increased utilization and spending on nonimaging services. Utilization of MRI, ultrasound, and x-ray increased from 2009 to 2013, whereas CT and nuclear medicine use decreased sharply, although CT was heavily impacted by billing code changes.     

Patient Race/Ethnicity and Diagnostic Imaging Utilization in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review

PurposeDiagnostic imaging often is a critical contributor to clinical decision making in the emergency department (ED). Racial and ethnic disparities are widely reported in many aspects of health care, and several recent studies have reported a link between patient race/ethnicity and receipt of imaging in the ED.MethodsThe authors conducted a systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, searching three databases (PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library) through July 2020 using keywords related to diagnostic imaging, race/ethnicity, and the ED setting, including both adult and pediatric populations and excluding studies that did not control for the important confounders of disease severity and insurance status.ResultsThe search strategy identified 7,313 articles, of which 5,668 underwent title and abstract screening and 238 full-text review, leaving 42 articles meeting the inclusion criteria. Studies were predominately conducted in the United States (41), split between adult (13) and pediatric (17) populations or both (12), and spread across a variety of topics, mostly focusing on specific anatomic regions or disease processes. Most studies (30 of 42 [71.4%]) reported an association between Black, African American, Hispanic, or nonwhite race/ethnicity and decreased receipt of imaging.ConclusionsDespite heterogeneity among studies, patient race/ethnicity is linked with receipt of diagnostic imaging in the ED. The strength and directionality of this association may differ by specific subpopulation and disease process, and more efforts to understand potential underlying factors are needed.     

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

PurposeThe 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.MethodsUsing 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.ResultsAggregate 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%).ConclusionsSubstantial 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.     

Nationwide Trends in Tube-Related Genitourinary Interventions for Medicare Beneficiaries

PurposeTo evaluate national trends in tube-related genitourinary interventions, with specific attention to primary operator specialty.MethodsUsing a 5% national sample of Medicare claims data from 2005 to 2015, all claims associated with nephrostomy tube, nephro-ureteral tube, and ureteral stent placement and exchange were identified. The annual volume of the nine billable procedures were analyzed to evaluate trends in the number of procedures performed and primary operator specialty over time. The Charleston Comorbidity Index (CCI) was used to evaluate patient comorbidities and to determine differences in patient populations treated by interventional radiologists and urologists.ResultsThe total volume of tube-related genitourinary interventions has increased over the course of the study period, representing 455.0 services per 100,000 Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries in 2005 to 607.2 services in 2015, an increase of 33.4%. Interventional radiologists performed the majority of all procedures in all procedure types and for each year (>90%) with the exception of nephro-ureteral catheter placement or ureteral stent placement, for which urologists performed the overwhelming majority of procedures each year (>85%). Interventional radiologists performed 63% of their total number of procedures on patients with a CCI = 3 or higher, and urologists performed 42% of their total number of procedures on patients with a CCI = 3 or higher (P < .01).ConclusionTube-related genitourinary interventions have demonstrated persistent growth over the 2005 to 2015 decade. Interventional radiologists are the dominant providers for the majority of these interventions compared with urologists while delivering care to a patient population with a higher number of comorbidities.     

The Percent Share of All Medicare Payments to Physicians That Is Attributable to Noninvasive Diagnostic Imaging

PurposeTo ascertain the proportion of all Medicare payments to physicians under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) that is attributable to noninvasive diagnostic imaging (NDI).Materials and MethodsThe Medicare Part B Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary Master Files for 2003 to 2015 were the data source. Total approved payments to physicians for all medical services were determined each year. We then selected all procedure codes for NDI and determined aggregate approved payments to physicians for those codes. Also, Medicare’s provider specialty codes were used to define payments to four provider categories: radiologists, cardiologists, all other physicians, and independent diagnostic testing facilities together with multispecialty groups (in this category, the specialty of the actual provider cannot be determined).ResultsTotal Medicare-approved payments for all physician services under the PFS increased progressively from $92.73 billion in 2003 to $132.85 billion in 2015. In 2003, the share of those payments attributable to NDI was 9.5%, increasing to a peak of 10.8% in 2006, but then progressively declining to 6.0% in 2015. All four provider categories saw the same trend pattern—a peak in 2006 but then decline thereafter. By 2015, the shares of total PFS payments to physicians that were attributable to NDI were as follows: radiologists 3.2%, cardiologists 1.2%, all other physicians 1.2%, independent diagnostic testing facilities or multispecialty groups 0.4%.ConclusionThe proportion of Medicare PFS spending on physician services that is attributable to NDI has been declining in recent years and is now quite small.     

Diagnostic Emergency Imaging Utilization at an Academic Trauma Center From 1996 to 2012

PurposeThe aim of this study was to retrospectively review the growth rate in emergency radiology volume at an urban academic trauma center from 1996 to 2012.MethodsThe authors reviewed aggregated billing data, for which the requirement for institutional review board approval was waived, from 1,458,230 diagnostic radiologic examinations ordered for emergency department (ED) visits from 1996 to 2012. The growth rate was calculated as the average annual percentage change in imaging examinations per ED visits. The growth rates between 1996 to 2003 and 2004 to 2012 were statistically compared using a t test.ResultsED patient visits showed continual growth at an average of 3% per year. Total imaging per ED visit grew from 1996 to 2003 at 4 ± 4% per year but significantly decreased from 2004 to 2012 at −2 ± 3% per year (P = .01). By modality, statistically significant decreased growth was observed in CT and MRI from 2004 to 2012. Ultrasound and x-ray showed unchanged growth from 1996 through 2012. ED physician ultrasound data available for 2002 to 2011 also showed increased growth.ConclusionsWhen adjusting ED imaging volume by ED visits, significantly decreased growth of overall ED imaging, specifically CT and MRI, was observed during the past 9 years. This may be due to slowing of new imaging indications, improved awareness of practice guidelines, and increased use of ultrasound. Although the national health care discussion focuses on continual imaging growth, these results demonstrate that long-term stability in ED imaging utilization is achievable.     

Patient Race or Ethnicity and the Use of Diagnostic Imaging: A Systematic Review

ObjectiveTo summarize the existing literature evaluating differences in imaging use based on patient race and ethnicity.MethodsThe authors performed a structured search of four databases for the dates January 1, 2000, to April 13, 2021, using key words and derivatives focused on imaging and patient race. Retrieved citations were reviewed by abstract and then full text to identify articles that evaluated the likelihood of imaging use by patient race or ethnicity controlling for sociodemographic factors. Data regarding publication characteristics, study population, clinical setting, and results was extracted and summarized.ResultsThe structured search identified 2,938 articles, of which 206 met inclusion criteria. Most studies (87%, 179 of 206) were conducted in the United States, and the majority (72%, 149 of 206) found decreased or inappropriate imaging use in minority groups. Breast cancer screening was the most common clinical setting (50%, 104 of 206), followed by cancer care (10%, 21 of 206) and general imaging use (9%, 19 of 206). Government-administered surveys were the most common data source (40%, 82 of 206). Only a small minority of studies (8%, 17 of 206) evaluated strategies to mitigate the unequal use of imaging based on patient race and ethnicity.DiscussionThe existing literature shows decreased or inappropriate use of diagnostic imaging for minority patients across a wide variety of clinical settings. Although the number of articles on the topic is large, the majority are clustered around specific topics, and few articles evaluate potential strategies to reduce the inequitable use of diagnostic imaging.     

Exacerbation of Inequities in Use of Diagnostic Radiology During the Early Stages of Reopening After COVID-19

ObjectiveAssess diagnostic radiology examination utilization and associated social determinants of health during the early stages of reopening after state-mandated shutdown of nonurgent services because of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsThis institutional review board–approved, retrospective study assessed all patients with diagnostic radiology examinations performed at an academic medical center with eight affiliated outpatient facilities before (January 1, 2020, to March 8, 2020) and after (June 7, 2020, to July 15, 2020) the COVID-19 shutdown. Examinations during the shut down (March 9, 2020, to June 6, 2020) were excluded. Patient-specific factors (eg, race, ethnicity), imaging modalities, and care settings were extracted from the Research Data Warehouse. Primary outcome was the number of diagnostic radiology examinations per day compared pre- and post-COVID-19 shutdown. Univariate analysis and multivariable logistic regression determined features associated with completing an examination.ResultsDespite resumption of nonurgent services, marked decrease in radiology examination utilization persisted in all care settings post-COVID-19 shutdown (869 examinations per day preshutdown [59,080 examinations in 68 days] versus 502 examinations per day postshutdown [19,594 examinations in 39 days]), with more significantly decreased odds ratios for having examinations in inpatient and outpatient settings versus in the emergency department. Inequities worsened, with patients from communities with high rates of poverty, unemployment, and chronic disease having significantly lower odds of undergoing radiology examinations post-COVID-19 shutdown. Patients of Asian race and Hispanic ethnicity had significantly lower odds ratios for having examinations post-COVID-19 shutdown compared with White and non-Hispanic patients, respectively.DiscussionThe COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated known pre-existing inequities in diagnostic radiology utilization. Resources should be allocated to address subgroups of patients who may be less likely to receive necessary diagnostic radiology examinations, potentially leading to compromised patient safety and quality of care.     

Perspectives on the Value of Advanced Medical Imaging: A National Survey of Primary Care Physicians

PurposeTo understand perceptions of primary care physicians (PCPs) about the value of advanced medical imaging.MethodsA national quantitative survey of 500 PCPs was conducted using an online self-administered questionnaire. Questions focused on advanced medical imaging (CT, MRI, and PET) and its perceived impact on the delivery of patient care. Responses were stratified by physician demographics.ResultsLarge majorities of the PCPs indicated that advanced imaging increases their diagnostic confidence (441; 88%); provides data not otherwise available (451; 90%); permits better clinical decision making (440; 88%); increases confidence in treatment choices (438; 88%), and shortens time to definitive diagnosis (430; 86%]). Most (424; 85%) believe that patient care would be negatively affected without access to advanced imaging. PCPs whose clinical careers predated the proliferation of advanced imaging modalities (>20 years of practice) assigned higher value to advanced imaging on several dimensions compared with younger physicians whose training overlapped widespread technology availability.ConclusionsBy a variety of metrics, large majorities of PCPs believe that advanced medical imaging provides considerable value to patient care. Those whose careers predated the widespread availability of advanced imaging tended to associate it with even higher value.