Literature DB >> 21982672

Appropriateness use criteria for transthoracic echocardiography: relationship with radiology benefit managers preauthorization determination and comparison of the new (2010) criteria to the original (2007) criteria.

Howard J Willens1, Robert C Hendel, Francine R Inhaber, Simon C Chakko, Cheryl Postel, Tahira Hasan, Fareed Mohammed.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In response to growth in cardiac imaging, medical societies have published appropriateness use criteria (AUC) and payers have introduced preauthorization mandates, largely through radiology benefits managers (RBM). The correlation of algorithms used to determine preauthorization with the AUC is unknown. In addition, studies applying the 2007 AUC for transthoracic echocardiography revealed that many echocardiograms could not be classified. We sought to examine the impact of the revised 2010 AUC on appropriateness ratings of transthoracic echocardiograms previously classified by the 2007 AUC and the relationship of preauthorization determination to AUC rating.
METHODS: We reclassified indications for transthoracic echocardiography as appropriate, inappropriate, uncertain, or unclassifiable using the 2010 AUC in the same 625 patients previously reported using 2007 AUC. We also evaluated the relationship between preauthorization status by 2 RBM precertification algorithms and appropriateness rating by 2007 AUC.
RESULTS: The appropriateness classification of 148 (24%) transthoracic echocardiograms was changed by the updated AUC (P < .001). The number of unclassifiable echocardiograms was markedly reduced from 99 (16%) to 8 (1%), and more echocardiograms were classified as inappropriate (95 [15%] vs 45 [7%]) or uncertain (43 [7%] vs 0 [0%]). Limited correlation between the 2007 AUC rating and RBM preauthorization determinations was noted, with only moderate agreement with RBM no. 1 (90%, κ = 0.480, P < .001) and poor agreement with RBM no. 2 (72%, κ = 0.177, P < .001).
CONCLUSION: The updated AUC (2010) provide enhanced clinical value compared with 2007 AUC. There is limited agreement between RBM preauthorization determination and 2007 AUC rating.
Copyright © 2011 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21982672     DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2011.07.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Heart J        ISSN: 0002-8703            Impact factor:   4.749


  5 in total

1.  Effects of an Electronic Medical Record Intervention on Appropriateness of Transthoracic Echocardiograms: A Prospective Study.

Authors:  Weihan Chen; David T Saxon; Michael P Henry; John R Herald; Rob Holleman; Debbie Zawol; Stacy Sivils; Mohamad A Kenaan; Theodore J Kolias; Hitinder S Gurm; Nicole M Bhave
Journal:  J Am Soc Echocardiogr       Date:  2020-11-01       Impact factor: 5.251

2.  The association of abnormal findings on transthoracic echocardiography with 2011 Appropriate Use Criteria and clinical impact.

Authors:  Thomas P Koshy; Anand Rohatgi; Sandeep R Das; Angela L Price; Andres deLuna; Nicholas Reimold; Kyle Willett; Sharon C Reimold; Susan A Matulevicius
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2015-01-23       Impact factor: 2.357

3.  Temporal trends in the utilization of echocardiography in Ontario, 2001 to 2009.

Authors:  Saul Blecker; R Sacha Bhatia; John J You; Douglas S Lee; David A Alter; Julie T Wang; Hannah J Wong; Jack V Tu
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2013-04

4.  Prior Authorization for Elective Diagnostic Catheterization: The Value of Reviewers in Cases with Clinical Ambiguity.

Authors:  Adam C Powell; Stephen E Price; Khoa Nguyen; Gary L Smith; James W Long; Uday U Deshmukh
Journal:  Am Health Drug Benefits       Date:  2018-06

5.  How I do it: judging appropriateness for TTE and TEE.

Authors:  Ricardo Fonseca; Thomas H Marwick
Journal:  Cardiovasc Ultrasound       Date:  2014-06-24       Impact factor: 2.062

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.