Xinglei Shen1, Timothy N Showalter2, Mark V Mishra2, Sanford Barth2, Vijay Rao2, David Levin2, Laurence Parker2. 1. University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS; Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA; and University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD xshen@kumc.edu. 2. University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS; Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA; and University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We evaluated long-term changes in the volume and payments for radiation oncology services in the intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) era from 2000 to 2010 using a database of Medicare claims. METHODS: We used the Medicare Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary Master File (PSPSMF) for each year from 2000 to 2010 to tabulate the volume and payments for radiation oncology services. This database provides a summary of each billing code submitted to Medicare part B. We identified all codes used in radiation oncology services and categorized billing codes by treatment modality and place of service. RESULTS: We focused our analysis on office-based practices. Total office-based patient volume increased 8.2% from 2000 to 2010, whereas total payments increased 217%. Increase in overall payments increased dramatically from 2000 to 2007, but subsequently plateaued from 2008 to 2010. Increases in complexity of care, and image guidance in particular, have also resulted in higher payments. CONCLUSION: The cost of radiation oncology services increased from 2000 to 2010, mostly due to IMRT, but also with significant contribution from increased overall complexity of care. A cost adjustment occurred after 2007, limiting further growth of payments. Future health policy studies should explore the potential for further cost containment, including differences in use between freestanding and hospital outpatient facilities.
PURPOSE: We evaluated long-term changes in the volume and payments for radiation oncology services in the intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) era from 2000 to 2010 using a database of Medicare claims. METHODS: We used the Medicare Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary Master File (PSPSMF) for each year from 2000 to 2010 to tabulate the volume and payments for radiation oncology services. This database provides a summary of each billing code submitted to Medicare part B. We identified all codes used in radiation oncology services and categorized billing codes by treatment modality and place of service. RESULTS: We focused our analysis on office-based practices. Total office-based patient volume increased 8.2% from 2000 to 2010, whereas total payments increased 217%. Increase in overall payments increased dramatically from 2000 to 2007, but subsequently plateaued from 2008 to 2010. Increases in complexity of care, and image guidance in particular, have also resulted in higher payments. CONCLUSION: The cost of radiation oncology services increased from 2000 to 2010, mostly due to IMRT, but also with significant contribution from increased overall complexity of care. A cost adjustment occurred after 2007, limiting further growth of payments. Future health policy studies should explore the potential for further cost containment, including differences in use between freestanding and hospital outpatient facilities.
Authors: Bin Huang; Therese A Dolecek; Quan Chen; Catherine R Garcia; Thomas Pittman; John L Villano Journal: Med Oncol Date: 2018-04-17 Impact factor: 3.064
Authors: Grace L Smith; Patricia A Ganz; Justin E Bekelman; Steven J Chmura; James J Dignam; Jason A Efstathiou; Reshma Jagsi; Peter A Johnstone; Michael L Steinberg; Stephen B Williams; James B Yu; Anthony L Zietman; Ralph R Weichselbaum; Ya-Chen Tina Shih Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2016-11-08 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Sean Maroongroge; Simon P Kim; Sarah Mougalian; Kimberly Johung; Roy H Decker; Pamela R Soulos; Jessica B Long; Cary P Gross; James B Yu Journal: Yale J Biol Med Date: 2015-06-01
Authors: Chai Hong Rim; Jeongshim Lee; Woo Chul Kim; DaeSik Yang; Won Sup Yoon; Woong Sub Koom; Chul Yong Kim Journal: J Korean Med Sci Date: 2018-02-26 Impact factor: 2.153