Literature DB >> 22190195

Central DXA utilization shifts from office-based to hospital-based settings among medicare beneficiaries in the wake of reimbursement changes.

Jie Zhang1, Elizabeth Delzell, Hong Zhao, Andrew J Laster, Kenneth G Saag, Meredith L Kilgore, Michael A Morrisey, Nicole C Wright, Huifeng Yun, Jeffrey R Curtis.   

Abstract

In the United States, Medicare gradually reduced payments for central dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) performed at physician offices (or other nonhospital settings) from an average of $139 in 2006 to about $82 in 2007 and 2008 and $72 in 2009. Reimbursement for hospital outpatient DXA service was unchanged. We investigated the utilization of hip and spine (central) DXA in the Medicare population before and after the reduction. We identified individuals from the national 5% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries who were ≥65 years of age and enrolled in Medicare Parts A and B but not in a Medicare Advantage plan from 2002 through 2009. For each calendar year, we calculated the proportion of beneficiaries who submitted claims for DXA, the proportions of DXAs performed in hospitals and in physician offices and the number of physician office-based practices that discontinued or started to provide DXA services. From 2002 to 2006, the proportion of beneficiaries who had at least one central DXA increased from 7.9% to 9.6% at an annual increase of 0.4% and from 2006 to 2009, the annual increase dropped to 0.1%. The number of DXAs performed in physician offices dropped from 1,643,720 (69% of 2,363,500 total DXAs) in 2006 to 1,534,240 (66% of 2,338,240) in 2009. This decline was offset by an increase in the number of DXAs performed in hospitals, which increased from 719,780 (31%) in 2006 to 804,000 (34%) in 2009. Among physician office-based practices, more practices initiated than discontinued DXA service each year from 2002 to 2006. However, the trend was reversed since 2007 such that in 2009, 1876 practices discontinued and only 1394 initiated DXA service. The reduction in DXA reimbursement was associated with a decrease in the number of DXAs performed in physician offices and fewer physician offices that provided DXA services.
Copyright © 2012 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22190195     DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.1534

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Miner Res        ISSN: 0884-0431            Impact factor:   6.741


  30 in total

1.  The effect modification of supplemental insurance on the relationship between race and bone mineral density screening in female Medicare beneficiaries.

Authors:  Ji Won Yoo; Shunichi Nakagawa; Sulgi Kim
Journal:  J Immigr Minor Health       Date:  2012-12

Review 2.  Bone Density Screening and Re-screening in Postmenopausal Women and Older Men.

Authors:  Margaret L Gourlay; Robert A Overman; Kristine E Ensrud
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 5.096

3.  Predictors of bone mineral density testing among older women on Medicare.

Authors:  Y Lou; S W Edmonds; M P Jones; F Ullrich; G L Wehby; P Cram; F D Wolinsky
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2016-06-30       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  Trends in osteoporosis and low bone mass in older US adults, 2005-2006 through 2013-2014.

Authors:  A C Looker; N Sarafrazi Isfahani; B Fan; J A Shepherd
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2017-03-18       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Choosing wisely: the American College of Rheumatology's Top 5 list of things physicians and patients should question.

Authors:  Jinoos Yazdany; Gabriela Schmajuk; Mark Robbins; David Daikh; Ashley Beall; Edward Yelin; Jennifer Barton; Adam Carlson; Mary Margaretten; Joann Zell; Lianne S Gensler; Victoria Kelly; Kenneth Saag; Charles King
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 4.794

6.  Vertebral bone attenuation on low-dose chest CT: quantitative volumetric analysis for bone fragility assessment.

Authors:  Y W Kim; J H Kim; S H Yoon; J H Lee; C-H Lee; C S Shin; Y S Park
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2016-08-01       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Cost-Effectiveness of Osteoporosis Screening Using Biomechanical Computed Tomography for Patients With a Previous Abdominal CT.

Authors:  Maria Pisu; David L Kopperdahl; Cora E Lewis; Kenneth G Saag; Tony M Keaveny
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2019-03-24       Impact factor: 6.741

8.  Osteoporosis and Hip Fracture Risk From Routine Computed Tomography Scans: The Fracture, Osteoporosis, and CT Utilization Study (FOCUS).

Authors:  Annette L Adams; Heidi Fischer; David L Kopperdahl; David C Lee; Dennis M Black; Mary L Bouxsein; Shireen Fatemi; Sundeep Khosla; Eric S Orwoll; Ethel S Siris; Tony M Keaveny
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2018-04-17       Impact factor: 6.741

9.  Overuse of short-interval bone densitometry: assessing rates of low-value care.

Authors:  N E Morden; W L Schpero; R Zaha; T D Sequist; C H Colla
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2014-05-09       Impact factor: 4.507

10.  Clinical assessment of the 1/3 radius using a new desktop ultrasonic bone densitometer.

Authors:  Emily M Stein; Fernando Rosete; Polly Young; Mafo Kamanda-Kosseh; Donald J McMahon; Gangming Luo; Jonathan J Kaufman; Elizabeth Shane; Robert S Siffert
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2013-01-11       Impact factor: 2.998

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.