Literature DB >> 30158087

Coronary CT Angiography: Reversal of Earlier Utilization Trends.

David C Levin1, Laurence Parker2, Ethan J Halpern2, Vijay M Rao2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess recent trends in utilization of coronary CT angiography (CCTA), based upon place of service and provider specialty.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The nationwide Medicare Part B master files for 2006 through 2016 were the data source. Current Procedural Terminology, version 4 codes for CCTA were selected. The files provided procedure volume for each code. Utilization rates per 100,000 Medicare fee-for-service enrollees were then calculated. Medicare's place-of-service codes were used to identify CCTAs performed in private offices, hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs), emergency departments (EDs), and inpatient settings. Physician specialty codes were used to identify CCTAs interpreted by radiologists, cardiologists, and all other physicians as a group. Medicare practice share was defined as the percent of total Medicare utilization that was billed by each specialty.
RESULTS: The total utilization rate of CCTA in the Medicare population rose sharply from 2006 to 2007, peaking at 210.3 per 100,000 enrollees in 2007. Radiologists' CCTA practice share in 2007 was 32%, compared with 60% for cardiologists. The overall utilization rate then declined to a nadir of 107.1 per 100,000 enrollees in 2013, but subsequently increased to 131.0 by 2016. By that year, radiologists' share of CCTA practice had risen to 58%, compared with 38% for cardiologists. HOPD utilization increased sharply since 2010, primarily among radiologists. In EDs and inpatient settings, greater utilization has also occurred recently, primarily among radiologists. By contrast, private office utilization has dropped sharply since 2007.
CONCLUSION: After years of declining utilization, the utilization rate of CCTA is now increasing, predominantly among radiologists.
Copyright © 2018 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Coronary CT angiography; coronary artery disease; hospital outpatient department utilization; imaging utilization; radiology and radiologists; socioeconomic issues

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30158087     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2018.07.022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol        ISSN: 1546-1440            Impact factor:   5.532


  5 in total

1.  Trends in Cardiovascular MRI and CT in the U.S. Medicare Population from 2012 to 2017.

Authors:  James W Goldfarb; Jonathan Weber
Journal:  Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging       Date:  2021-02-25

2.  Cardiac Imaging Trends from 2010 to 2019 in the Medicare Population.

Authors:  Russell A Reeves; Ethan J Halpern; Vijay M Rao
Journal:  Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging       Date:  2021-09-30

3.  The accuracy of coronary CT angiography in patients with coronary calcium score above 1000 Agatston Units: Comparison with quantitative coronary angiography.

Authors:  Alan C Kwan; Heidi Gransar; Evangelos Tzolos; Billy Chen; Yuka Otaki; Eyal Klein; Adele J Pope; Donghee Han; Andrew Howarth; Nishita Jain; Damini Dey; Robert Jh Miller; Victor Cheng; Babak Azarbal; Daniel S Berman
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr       Date:  2021-03-20

Review 4.  Machine Learning for Assessment of Coronary Artery Disease in Cardiac CT: A Survey.

Authors:  Nils Hampe; Jelmer M Wolterink; Sanne G M van Velzen; Tim Leiner; Ivana Išgum
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2019-11-26

Review 5.  Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography From Clinical Uses to Emerging Technologies: JACC State-of-the-Art Review.

Authors:  Khaled M Abdelrahman; Marcus Y Chen; Amit K Dey; Renu Virmani; Aloke V Finn; Ramzi Y Khamis; Andrew D Choi; James K Min; Michelle C Williams; Andrew J Buckler; Charles A Taylor; Campbell Rogers; Habib Samady; Charalambos Antoniades; Leslee J Shaw; Matthew J Budoff; Udo Hoffmann; Ron Blankstein; Jagat Narula; Nehal N Mehta
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2020-09-08       Impact factor: 24.094

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.