Literature DB >> 25700662

DXA Utilization Between 2006 and 2012 in Commercially Insured Younger Postmenopausal Women.

Robert A Overman1, Joel F Farley2, Jeffrey R Curtis3, Jie Zhang4, Margaret L Gourlay5, Chad L Deal6.   

Abstract

Reimbursement for dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans in the outpatient setting has declined significantly since 2006. Research through 2011 has suggested reimbursement reductions for DXA scans have corresponded with an overall decreased utilization of DXA. This study updates utilization estimates for DXAs through 2012 in patients with commercial insurance and compares DXA rates before and after reimbursement changes. We evaluated DXA utilization for women aged 50-64 yr from Marketscan Commercial Claims and Encounter database between January 2006 and December 2012 based on CPT codes. We estimated utilization rates per 1000 person years (PY). We also used segmented regression analysis of monthly rates to evaluate the change in utilization rates after a proposed reimbursement reduction in July 2009. In women aged 50-64 yr, 451,656 DXAs were performed in 2006, a rate of 144 DXAs per 1000 PY. This rate increased to 149 DXAs per 1000 PY in 2009 before decreasing to 110 DXAs per 1000 PY or 667,982 scans in 2012. DXA utilization increased by 2.24 per 1000 PY until July 2009 then declined by 12.98 DXAs per 1000 persons, resulting in 37.5 DXAs per PY fewer performed in 2012 compared with 2006. Since July 2009 a significant decline in DXA utilization occurred in a younger postmenopausal commercially insured population. This decline corresponds with a time period of reductions in Medicare DXA reimbursement.
Copyright © 2015 The International Society for Clinical Densitometry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA); osteoporosis; reimbursement; utilization

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25700662      PMCID: PMC4420644          DOI: 10.1016/j.jocd.2015.01.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Densitom        ISSN: 1094-6950            Impact factor:   2.617


  14 in total

1.  Medicare payment cuts for osteoporosis testing reduced use despite tests' benefit in reducing fractures.

Authors:  Alison B King; Donna M Fiorentino
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 6.301

2.  Segmented regression analysis of interrupted time series studies in medication use research.

Authors:  A K Wagner; S B Soumerai; F Zhang; D Ross-Degnan
Journal:  J Clin Pharm Ther       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 2.512

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

Authors:  Jie Zhang; Elizabeth Delzell; Hong Zhao; Andrew J Laster; Kenneth G Saag; Meredith L Kilgore; Michael A Morrisey; Nicole C Wright; Huifeng Yun; Jeffrey R Curtis
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 6.741

4.  Bone density testing can strengthen bottom line.

Authors:  Annette M Boyle
Journal:  Med Econ       Date:  2012-06-10

5.  Observation stays in administrative claims databases: underestimation of hospitalized cases.

Authors:  Robert A Overman; Janet K Freburger; Magdalene M Assimon; Xiaojuan Li; M Alan Brookhart
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2014-05-28       Impact factor: 2.890

6.  Trends in dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in the United States, 2000-2009.

Authors:  Cynthia D O'Malley; Stephen S Johnston; Gregory Lenhart; Gregory Cherkowski; Liisa Palmer; Sarah L Morgan
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2011 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.617

7.  The recent prevalence of osteoporosis and low bone mass in the United States based on bone mineral density at the femoral neck or lumbar spine.

Authors:  Nicole C Wright; Anne C Looker; Kenneth G Saag; Jeffrey R Curtis; Elizabeth S Delzell; Susan Randall; Bess Dawson-Hughes
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 6.741

8.  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

Review 9.  Practice patterns in the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis after a fragility fracture: a systematic review.

Authors:  V Elliot-Gibson; E R Bogoch; S A Jamal; D E Beaton
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-07-16       Impact factor: 4.507

10.  The clinical diagnosis of osteoporosis: a position statement from the National Bone Health Alliance Working Group.

Authors:  E S Siris; R Adler; J Bilezikian; M Bolognese; B Dawson-Hughes; M J Favus; S T Harris; S M Jan de Beur; S Khosla; N E Lane; R Lindsay; A D Nana; E S Orwoll; K Saag; S Silverman; N B Watts
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2014-02-28       Impact factor: 4.507

View more
  13 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  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

3.  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

4.  Medical management patterns in a US commercial claims database following a nontraumatic fracture in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  Xin Wang; Xiaoqing Xu; Mary Oates; Timothy Hill; Rolin L Wade
Journal:  Arch Osteoporos       Date:  2022-07-14       Impact factor: 2.879

5.  Bone densitometry worldwide: a global survey by the ISCD and IOF.

Authors:  M A Clynes; L D Westbury; E M Dennison; J A Kanis; M K Javaid; N C Harvey; M Fujita; C Cooper; W D Leslie; C R Shuhart
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2020-05-06       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 6.  The impact of fragility fracture and approaches to osteoporosis risk assessment worldwide.

Authors:  Elizabeth M Curtis; Rebecca J Moon; Nicholas C Harvey; Cyrus Cooper
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2017-01-22       Impact factor: 4.398

7.  Reprint of: The impact of fragility fracture and approaches to osteoporosis risk assessment worldwide.

Authors:  Elizabeth M Curtis; Rebecca J Moon; Nicholas C Harvey; Cyrus Cooper
Journal:  Int J Orthop Trauma Nurs       Date:  2017-04-26

Review 8.  General and Specific Considerations as to why Osteoporosis-Related Care Is Often Suboptimal.

Authors:  Elizabeth M Curtis; Stephen Woolford; Claire Holmes; Cyrus Cooper; Nicholas C Harvey
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 5.096

9.  Appropriateness of bone density measurement in Switzerland: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Stefan Zechmann; Nathalie Scherz; Oliver Reich; Beat Brüngger; Oliver Senn; Thomas Rosemann; Stefan Neuner-Jehle
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2018-04-02       Impact factor: 3.295

10.  Secular trends in the initiation of therapy in secondary fracture prevention in Europe: a multi-national cohort study including data from Denmark, Catalonia, and the United Kingdom.

Authors:  M K Skjødt; S Khalid; M Ernst; K H Rubin; D Martinez-Laguna; A Delmestri; M K Javaid; C Cooper; C Libanati; E Toth; B Abrahamsen; D Prieto-Alhambra
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2020-03-17       Impact factor: 4.507

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.