How Radiologists Are Paid: An Economic History, Part IV: End of the Bubble

Current Controversies in Radiology on Cost, Reimbursement, and Price Transparency: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review

Many believe that fundamental reform of the U.S. healthcare system is overdue and necessary given rising national healthcare expenditures, poor performance on key population health metrics, meaningful health disparities, concerns about potential financial toxicity of care, inadequate price transparency, pending insolvency of Medicare Part A, increasing commercial insurance premiums, and significant uninsured and underinsured populations. The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC), an independent congressional agency, believes that part of this reform includes redistribution of reimbursements away from specialties such as radiology. Thus, despite an increase in the Medicare population and spending, Medicare payments for medical imaging have been decreasing for years. Further, the No Surprises Act, a federal law intended to curb the problem of surprise medical billing, was re-purposed in federal rule-making to reduce reimbursement from commercial payers to certain specialties including radiology. In this article, we examine challenges facing the U.S. healthcare system, focusing on cost, reimbursement, and price transparency, and the role of radiology in addressing such challenges. Medical imaging is a minor contributor to national healthcare expenditures, but provides an outsized impact on patient care. The radiology community should work together to demonstrate the value of medical imaging and reduce inappropriate utilization of low-value care.

Cardiac Imaging Trends from 2010 to 2019 in the Medicare Population

Purpose

To evaluate changes in utilization of cardiac imaging-transthoracic, transesophageal, and stress echocardiography (TTE, TEE, and SE), coronary CT angiography (cCTA), cardiac MRI (cMRI), myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI), and cardiac positron emission tomography (cPET).

Materials and Methods

The 2010-2019 Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary files were used to find imaging utilization per 100 000 Medicare beneficiaries. Global and professional claims were aggregated, representing total interpretive services. Specialty codes identified provider specialty. Results were stratified by physician offices, hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs), inpatient setting, and the emergency department.

Results

From 2010 to 2019, there was a partial shift from cardiologist offices to the HOPD for TTE (office: -23%; HOPD: +107%) and SE (office: -44%; HOPD: +11%). Cardiologist cCTA also shifted from the office (-57%) to the HOPD (+211%). Radiologist-performed cCTA grew in all locations but most in the HOPD (+355%), with radiologists performing more cCTA than cardiologists in all settings. cMRI rates remain low but rose in the HOPD for both cardiologists (+209%) and radiologists (+207%). Cardiologist MPI rates dropped dramatically in the office (-52%), with a smaller absolute rate increase in the HOPD (+71%). cPET nearly tripled in the cardiology office (+193%), but rates remained steady for radiologists.

Conclusion

While most cardiologist in-office imaging has shifted to the HOPD, there has been an increase in in-office cPET, likely due to a combination of technological advances, interpretation familiarity, and financial incentives. Radiologist cCTA rates continue to increase, representing a growing opportunity for radiologists to collaborate in cardiac imaging.Keywords: CT Angiography, Echocardiography, MR Imaging, PET, Radionuclide Studies, SPECT, Cardiac, Work Force Issues Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2021.

Cost-Sharing and Out-of-Pocket Cost for Women Who Received MRI for Breast Cancer Screening

BACKGROUND

The financial protection of the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) prevention provision doesn't apply to breast MRI but only to mammography for breast cancer screening. The purpose of the study is to examine the financial burden among women who received breast MRI for screening.

METHODS

This observational study used the Marketscan® database. Women underwent breast MRI between 2009 and 2017 and had screening mammography within 6 months of the MRI were included. We compared the time trend of the proportion of zero cost-share for women undergoing screening mammography and that for MRI. We quantified out-of-pocket (OOP) costs as the sum of copayment, coinsurance, and deductible and defined zero cost-share as having no OOP cost. We conducted multivariable logistic regression and two-part model to examine factors associated with zero cost-share and OOP costs of MRI, respectively.

RESULTS

16,341 women had a screening breast MRI during the study period. The proportion of screening MRI claims with zero cost-share decreased from 43.1% (2009) to 26.2% (2017). The adjusted mean OOP cost for women in high-deductible plans was more than twice the cost for their counterparts ($549 vs. $251, 2-sided P < .001). Women who resided in the South in the post-ACA era were less likely to have zero cost-share and paid higher OOP costs for screening MRI.

CONCLUSIONS

Many women are subject to high financial burden when receiving MRI for breast cancer screening. Those enrolled in high-deductible plans and who reside in the South are especially vulnerable financially.

Clinician-Scientists: Can They Survive in the Modern Era?

Clinician-scientists are commonly characterized as health care professionals who are proficient in both research and clinical practice. Their dual expertise positions them to play a vital role in translating research outcomes to clinical practice. However, economic changes in the past few decades are threatening their very survival. The purposes of this article are to review some of the economic forces that pose the greatest risks to clinician-scientists in the modern era and to glean lessons from the business world in overcoming these challenges. Health care consolidation and decreasing reimbursements are putting increasing financial pressure on academic institutions, leaving them more inclined to cut back on departmental research support. Innovative companies commit a certain percentage of their revenue to research and discovery. Academic institutions should similarly view their research budget as research and discovery that will sustain the future growth of radiology. They should quantify and define expectations for academic productivity, focus on return on investment, and bolster the infrastructure to foster commercial partnerships that can provide additional revenue to support the research mission. Success in academics does not occur by accident. It requires more than individual talent and hard work. It also requires institutional leaders who are committed to developing future academic leaders and supporting innovation.