Functional MR imaging versus Wada test for evaluation of language lateralization: cost analysis.

PURPOSE: To compare the total direct costs (fixed and variable costs) of functional magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and of the Wada test for evaluation of language lateralization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The direct fixed and variable costs of functional MR imaging (performed in 21 patients with mean age +/- SD of 15.5 years +/- 8.9) and of the Wada test (performed in 18 patients aged 19.2 years +/- 5.4) were determined prospectively with time and motion analyses. The labor of all personnel involved in evaluations of language lateralization was tracked, and involvement times were recorded to the nearest minute. All material items used in the studies were recorded. Costs of labor and of materials were determined from personnel reimbursement data and from vendor pricing, respectively. Direct fixed costs were determined from hospital accounting department records. Means (+/- SDs) were calculated for all direct fixed and variable costs. Total direct costs were determined for each procedure and compared by using the Student t test. RESULTS: The total direct costs of the Wada test (US dollars 1130.01 +/- US dollars 138.40) and of functional MR imaging (US dollars 301.82 +/- US dollars 10.65) were significantly different (P <.001). The cost of the Wada test was 3.7 times higher than that of functional MR imaging. CONCLUSION: Substantial savings are achievable with the use of functional MR imaging instead of the Wada test to evaluate language lateralization.

Introduction to evidence-based imaging.

Society is increasingly demanding proof that imaging has an impact on patient outcome and questioning its cost on the health care delivery system. Radiologists should provide the following three key components in their research publications: (1) the statistical power and confidence intervals of the results obtained; (2) the diagnostic performance of the tests, including sensitivity, specificity, and ROC curves; and (3) comprehensive decision analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis to determine the impact that imaging has on health outcome, cost, and quality of life. Strict adherence to these evidence-based medicine principles would help advance the field and provide the best health care for patients.

Vesicoureteral reflux imaging in children: comparative cost analysis.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare the costs of voiding cystourethrography (VCUG) versus radionuclide cystography (RNC) for evaluation of vesicoureteral reflux in children. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The variable direct costs of performing 25 VCUG and 25 RNC examinations in age- and general health-matched patients suspected of having vesicoureteral reflux was determined by using time and motion analyses. All personnel directly involved in the cases were tracked, and the involvement times were recorded to the nearest minute. All material items used during the procedures were recorded. The cost of labor was determined from personnel reimbursement data, and the cost of materials, from vendor pricing. The fixed direct costs were assessed from hospital accounting records. Mean, standard deviation, and 95% confidence interval (CI) were determined for all direct (fixed and variable) costs. The total costs were determined for each procedure and compared by using the Student t test. RESULTS: There was a significant difference (P < .0001) between the mean total direct cost of VCUG ($112.17 +/- 10.33) and that of RNC ($64.58 +/- 1.91). VCUG examination for vesicoureteral reflux in children cost 1.74 times more than RNC examination (95% CI: 1.28, 2.36). CONCLUSION: When the technique is clinically appropriate, institutions may obtain substantial cost savings by using RNC in place of VCUG for examining children suspected of having vesicoureteral reflux.