Teleradiology: a case study of the economic and legal considerations in international trade in telemedicine

Comparison of European (ESR) and American (ACR) white papers on teleradiology: patient primacy is paramount

The ACR and European Society of Radiology white papers on teleradiology propose best practice guidelines for teleradiology, with each body focusing on its respective local situation, market, and legal regulations. The organizations have common viewpoints, the most important being patient primacy, maintenance of quality, and the "supplementary" position of teleradiology to local services. The major differences between the white papers are related mainly to the market situation, the use of teleradiology, teleradiologist credentialing and certification, the principles of "international" teleradiology, and the need to obtain "informed consent" from patients. The authors describe these similarities and differences by highlighting the background and context of teleradiology in Europe and the United States.

The accuracy of radiology speech recognition reports in a multilingual South African teaching hospital

Background

Speech recognition (SR) technology, the process whereby spoken words are converted to digital text, has been used in radiology reporting since 1981. It was initially anticipated that SR would dominate radiology reporting, with claims of up to 99% accuracy, reduced turnaround times and significant cost savings. However, expectations have not yet been realised. The limited data available suggest SR reports have significantly higher levels of inaccuracy than traditional dictation transcription (DT) reports, as well as incurring greater aggregate costs.

There has been little work on the clinical significance of such errors, however, and little is known of the impact of reporter seniority on the generation of errors, or the influence of system familiarity on reducing error rates.

Furthermore, there have been conflicting findings on the accuracy of SR amongst users with English as first- and second-language respectively.

Methods

The aim of the study was to compare the accuracy of SR and DT reports in a resource-limited setting. The first 300 SR and the first 300 DT reports generated during March 2010 were retrieved from the hospital’s PACS, and reviewed by a single observer. Text errors were identified, and then classified as either clinically significant or insignificant based on their potential impact on patient management. In addition, a follow-up analysis was conducted exactly 4 years later.

Results

Of the original 300 SR reports analysed, 25.6% contained errors, with 9.6% being clinically significant. Only 9.3% of the DT reports contained errors, 2.3% having potential clinical impact. Both the overall difference in SR and DT error rates, and the difference in ‘clinically significant’ error rates (9.6% vs. 2.3%) were statistically significant. In the follow-up study, the overall SR error rate was strikingly similar at 24.3%, 6% being clinically significant.

Radiologists with second-language English were more likely to generate reports containing errors, but level of seniority had no bearing.

Conclusion

SR technology consistently increased inaccuracies in Tygerberg Hospital (TBH) radiology reports, thereby potentially compromising patient care. Awareness of increased error rates in SR reports, particularly amongst those transcribing in a second-language, is important for effective implementation of SR in a multilingual healthcare environment.

A national teleradiology programme in Mali: implementation and results

We reviewed the national teleradiology programme in Mali to establish whether it improved diagnosis for patients and improved the referring doctor's ability to give an accurate diagnosis. The teleradiology programme connected the University Hospital in Bamako to all seven regional hospitals in Mali and one private health clinic. The pilot phase began in 2005 in three hospitals. Initially the implementation involved connections via broadband, but subsequently satellite antennae were provided at three remote hospitals in the north. Between 2005 and 2013, X-ray and mammogram images from 5628 patients were read by teleradiology. Radiologists provided the sole diagnosis for 29% of cases (i.e. the referrer did not make a diagnosis) and altered the regional doctor's diagnosis in 12% of cases. The proportion of cases for which the regional doctor gave no diagnosis decreased from 93% to 24% over the same period, indicating an increase in the doctors' confidence and incentive to test their own diagnosis. The percentage of cases for which regional doctors made an inaccurate diagnosis decreased to 3% in 2013. Use of the teleradiology service varied widely between hospitals. Successful implementation depended on local ownership of a network, which was developed in close collaboration with hospital leadership, national radiologists and other healthcare personnel.

Factors in the selection of a teleradiology provider in the United States

Commercial teleradiology is well established in the US. There are many factors to consider when engaging a teleradiology provider. One of the basic questions is what do you expect to gain from it? Do you want a final reading from an attending radiologist (known as a consultant radiologist in many countries) or would you be satisfied with a preliminary reading from a teleradiology provider and a final reading from your own in-house radiologist the following day? Do you simply require after-hours coverage or do you need to supplement the coverage provided by your own internal radiologists during normal working hours? Teleradiology is not without its drawbacks. It can add additional costs, particularly for after-hours coverage. Teleradiology rarely provides in-house coverage for procedures, and the interpreting radiologist may sometimes be difficult to contact for consultation. Choosing a teleradiology vendor requires due diligence. When the contracting entity defines its expectations well and chooses its teleradiology vendor with care, the end result will be satisfactory for all concerned, including the patients.

The regionalization of pediatric health care

Regionalization of health care is a method of providing high-quality, cost-efficient health care to the largest number of patients. Within pediatric medicine, regionalization has been undertaken in 2 areas: neonatal intensive care and pediatric trauma care. The supporting literature for the regionalization of these areas demonstrates the range of studies within this field: studies of neonatal intensive care primarily compare different levels of hospitals, whereas studies of pediatric trauma care primarily compare the impact of institutionalizing a trauma system in a single geographic region. However, neither specialty has been completely regionalized, possibly because of methodologic deficiencies in the evidence base. Research with improved study designs, controlling for differences in illness severity between different hospitals; a systems approach to regionalization studies; and measurement of parental preferences will improve the understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of regionalizing pediatric medicine and will ultimately optimize the outcomes of children.

Will India set the price for teleradiology?

BACKGROUND

With a lower cost for labour, Indian teleradiologists have an absolute price advantage in the global market. However, because trade is determined by comparative advantage rather than absolute price advantage, India's ability to export teleradiology services may be limited. The issue is, can the 'India price' for teleradiology set the price for these services in the USA?

METHODS

Review of the economic literature concerning the global teleradiology market.

RESULTS

Currently, minimal information exists concerning the economic of global teleradiology market. However, a Ricardian analysis of this market suggests that India's ability to export teleradiology may be limited by rising opportunity costs (i.e. social unrest). Similarly, Heckscher-Ohlin analysis suggests that a lack of English-speaking physicians will limit India's ability to export teleradiology services to the USA.

CONCLUSION

It appears unlikely that India will gain sufficient market share in the USA to determine the price of teleradiology services.

The reasons that many radiology practices don't use off-hours services

PURPOSE

To compare radiology practices that use external, internal, and no off-hours services.

METHODS

From August 2005 to June 2006, 300 nonspecialty hospitals randomly selected from the AHA Guide 2005 Edition were contacted by telephone, e-mail, and mail, with attempts made to speak to the chiefs of radiology. A total of 115 responses were obtained (a 38.3% response rate), with 64 from radiology practices that used external off-hours services, 13 from practices with internal services, and 38 from practices with no services. The demographics of the practices in the 3 categories were compared, and answers to category-specific survey questions were tabulated. Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Radiology practices using internal off-hours services were significantly larger (mean size, 19.9 full-time radiologists) than those using external off-hours services (mean size, 8.2 full-time radiologists) and those not using any off-hours service (mean size, 10.7 full-time radiologists). A sufficient number of radiologists or residents covering nights had the highest reported importance in the decision not to adopt an external service. Cost and quality concerns were also cited. The consistency of interpreting radiologists known to a practice had the highest importance in the decision to use an internal rather than an external off-hours service. Frequent reasons cited for radiologists to take regular internal off-hours employment were financial incentives provided and a preference for off-hours shifts.

CONCLUSIONS

As long as there are sufficient numbers of radiologists and residents to handle the volume of interpretations, many practices will not use external off-hours services. Such services could help increase their adoption by offering lower cost and proven quality.

A survey of radiology practices' use of after-hours radiology services

PURPOSE

The study's purpose was to identify the characteristics of and the motives behind radiologists' use of after-hours services.

METHODS

From August of 2005 to June of 2006, 300 nonspecialty hospitals randomly selected from the 2005 American Hospital Association Directory of Hospitals were contacted by phone, e-mail, and mail, with an attempt made to speak to the chiefs of radiology. We obtained 115 responses, a 38.3% response rate, including 64 from practices that used an external after-hours service. These 64 are the subject of this study. Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistical analyses.

RESULTS

Practices gave convenience as the most important reason they use after-hours services, with value for recruiting ranked second and shortage of radiologists for off-hours coverage ranked third. Three-fourths of practices said they receive 5% or less of their reads from these services. Two-thirds of practices paid the service approximately as much as they collected or more. Approximately 40% of respondents used an after-hours service located internationally. Of these, 56% said that the radiologists reading internationally were either all Americans or mostly Americans and 40% did not know the proportion of foreigners. Regardless, in-state licensure of all interpreting teleradiologists is essentially universal.

CONCLUSION

Most radiology groups using after-hours services do so for convenience rather than shortage of staff to provide coverage. Most practices send a small percentage of their studies to the services. Although overseas-located services are commonly used, there is little evidence of other than American radiologists or American-trained radiologists at these services.

Will reputational incentives stimulate a reversal of the physician brain drain?

An increased supply of physicians in high income countries both from domestic production and from immigration from low and middle income countries has made medical employment increasingly competitive. This has been heightened by the introduction of reputational incentives, such as public reporting of physicians' outcomes, and the use of other health care professionals, such as nurses. An unanticipated consequence might be a reversal of the 'brain drain', with physicians migrating to low and middle income countries.

Is a black market in telemedicine on the horizon?

BACKGROUND

Regulation of a global market by regional licensure systems and trade barriers has significant drawbacks.

METHODS

Literature review of telemedicine, law and economics.

RESULTS

Today's patients are willing to use out-of-pocket dollars to purchase medical care from: (a) foreign physicians in the medical tourism market; and (b) nurse-practitioners in pharmacy clinics. As telemedicine comes of age, patients are likely to purchase more health care from foreign telemedical 'pharmacy' clinics to avoid the costs, and the hassle, of travel. Many of these foreign medicine providers are likely to be unlicensed. This is problematic because experience with Mydoc.com and Usanetrx.com demonstrates that today's patients are relatively unconcerned with the licensure status of telemedicine providers. Accordingly, the elements of a black market in telemedicine may be on the horizon. Strengthening medical licensure laws is unlikely to keep foreign providers out the US health care market forever. Alternatively, one method to minimize the size of a black market in telemedical services would be to allow the market to regulate itself through the creation of a commodities-type exchange.

CONCLUSION

Now is the time to open a global dialogue on how to regulate telemedicine.

The state of teleradiology in 2003 and changes since 1999

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of our study is to describe in detail the use of teleradiology in 2003 and to report on changes since 1999 in this rapidly evolving field.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyze non-individually identified data from the American College of Radiology's 2003 Survey of Radiologists, a stratified random sample mail survey that achieved a response rate of 63%, and data from the American College of Radiology's 1999 Survey of Practices. Responses were weighted to represent the distribution of individual radiologists and radiology practices nationwide. We present descriptive statistics and multivariable regression analysis results on the prevalence and uses of teleradiology in 2003 and comparisons with 1999.

RESULTS

Overall, 67% of all radiology practices in the United States, which included 78% of all U.S. radiologists, reported using teleradiology. A significant increase (p < 0.05) was seen in the prevalence of teleradiology or PACS, from 58% of practices in 1999 to 73% in 2003. Regression results indicate that, other practice characteristics being equal, in 2003, primarily academic practices were less likely to use teleradiology than private radiology practices, and medium-sized practices (5-14 radiologists) were more likely to have teleradiology than larger ones. In practices using teleradiology, home was the most frequent receiving site in both 1999 (81%) and 2003 (75%), the percentages being not significantly different.

CONCLUSION

Already a fixture of radiology practice in 1999, teleradiology increased in prevalence substantially by 2003. The primary use of teleradiology, transmission of images to home, did not change, suggesting that easing the burden of call remains the main use of teleradiology.

The legal and economic forces that will shape the international market for cybersurgery

BACKGROUND

Despite the common use of medical devices most health care providers have little understanding how a device alters medical malpractice litigation. Such knowledge will be increasingly valuable as cybersurgery (i.e. remote robotic surgery) becomes routine.

METHODS

Review of the laws governing products and telecommunication liability.

RESULTS

Litigation after cybersurgery will be complex. In addition to being able to sue physicians and hospitals, patients who sustain an adverse outcome after cybersurgery will have the potential to sue the robotic manufacturer and telecommunication company. Robotics manufacturers can obtain virtual immunity from liability if they elected to place their devices on the market after obtaining [see text]360 per-market approval from the FDA. However, because [see text]360 pre-market approval is expensive and time consuming most medical devices on the market (including the robotic surgical instruments) do not have immunity to products liability. Consequently, after an adverse cybersurgical outcome a manufacturer of a robotic surgical instrument faces liability for failure to warn, design defects, and failure to properly manufacture. As for telecommunication providers, existing law provides them with immunity from liability.

CONCLUSIONS

Litigation following cybersurgery will involve multiple defendants who are likely to use "finger pointing" defenses. Accordingly, there will be liability traps associated with providing cybersurgery.