Michal Horný1, James F Burgess2, Alan B Cohen3. 1. Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts. Electronic address: mhorny@bu.edu. 2. Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts; US Department of Veterans Affairs, Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, Boston, Massachusetts. 3. Boston University Questrom School of Business, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to investigate whether the increase in utilization of advanced diagnostic imaging for privately insured patients in 2011 was the beginning of a new trend in imaging utilization growth, or an isolated deviation from the declining trend that began in 2008. METHODS: We extracted outpatient and inpatient CT, diagnostic ultrasound, MRI, and PET procedures from databases, for the years 2007 to 2013. This study extended previous work, covering 2012 to 2013, using the same methodology. For every year of the study period, we calculated the following: number of procedures per person-year covered by private health insurance; proportion of office and emergency visits that resulted in an imaging session; average payments per procedure; and total payments per person-year covered by private health insurance. RESULTS: Outpatient utilization of CT and PET decreased in both 2012 and 2013; outpatient utilization of MRI mildly increased in 2012, but then decreased in 2013. Outpatient utilization of diagnostic ultrasound showed a very different pattern, increasing throughout the study period. Inpatient utilization of all imaging modalities except PET decreased in both 2012 and 2013. Adjusted payments for all imaging modalities increased in 2012, and then dropped substantially in 2013, except the adjusted payments for diagnostic ultrasound that increased in 2013 again. CONCLUSIONS: The trend of increasing utilization of advanced diagnostic imaging seems to be over for some, but not all, imaging modalities. A combination of policy (eg, breast density notification laws), technologic advancement, and wider access seems to be responsible for at least part of an increasing utilization of diagnostic ultrasound.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to investigate whether the increase in utilization of advanced diagnostic imaging for privately insured patients in 2011 was the beginning of a new trend in imaging utilization growth, or an isolated deviation from the declining trend that began in 2008. METHODS: We extracted outpatient and inpatient CT, diagnostic ultrasound, MRI, and PET procedures from databases, for the years 2007 to 2013. This study extended previous work, covering 2012 to 2013, using the same methodology. For every year of the study period, we calculated the following: number of procedures per person-year covered by private health insurance; proportion of office and emergency visits that resulted in an imaging session; average payments per procedure; and total payments per person-year covered by private health insurance. RESULTS:Outpatient utilization of CT and PET decreased in both 2012 and 2013; outpatient utilization of MRI mildly increased in 2012, but then decreased in 2013. Outpatient utilization of diagnostic ultrasound showed a very different pattern, increasing throughout the study period. Inpatient utilization of all imaging modalities except PET decreased in both 2012 and 2013. Adjusted payments for all imaging modalities increased in 2012, and then dropped substantially in 2013, except the adjusted payments for diagnostic ultrasound that increased in 2013 again. CONCLUSIONS: The trend of increasing utilization of advanced diagnostic imaging seems to be over for some, but not all, imaging modalities. A combination of policy (eg, breast density notification laws), technologic advancement, and wider access seems to be responsible for at least part of an increasing utilization of diagnostic ultrasound.
Authors: Amanda L Blackford; Marcia Irene Canto; Alison P Klein; Ralph H Hruban; Michael Goggins Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2020-11-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Arthur S Hong; David Levin; Laurence Parker; Vijay M Rao; Dennis Ross-Degnan; J Frank Wharam Journal: Radiology Date: 2019-12-31 Impact factor: 29.146
Authors: Randy C Miles; Christoph I Lee; Qin Sun; Aasthaa Bansal; Gary H Lyman; Jennifer M Specht; Catherine R Fedorenko; Mikael Anne Greenwood-Hickman; Scott D Ramsey; Janie M Lee Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 12.693
Authors: M Fernanda Bellolio; Herbert C Heien; Lindsey R Sangaralingham; Molly M Jeffery; Ronna L Campbell; Daniel Cabrera; Nilay D Shah; Erik P Hess Journal: West J Emerg Med Date: 2017-07-19