Cost of Low-Value Imaging Worldwide: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Imaging with low or no benefit for the patient undermines the quality of care and amounts to vast opportunity costs. More than 3.6 billion imaging examinations are performed annually, and about 20-50% of these are of low value. This study aimed to synthesize knowledge of the costs of low-value imaging worldwide. METHODS: This systematic review was based on the PRISMA statement. The database search was developed in Medline and further adapted to Embase-Ovid, Cochrane Library, and Scopus. Primary empirical studies assessing the costs of low-value diagnostic imaging were included if published between 2012 and March 2022. Studies designed as randomized controlled trials, non-randomized trials, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, descriptive studies, cost analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, and mixed-methods studies were eligible. The analysis was descriptive. RESULTS: Of 5,567 records identified, 106 were included. Most of the studies included were conducted in the USA (n = 76), and a hospital or medical center was the most common setting (n = 82). Thirty-eight of the included studies calculated the costs of multiple imaging modalities; in studies with only one imaging modality included, conventional radiography was the most common (n = 32). Aggregated costs for low-value examinations amounts to billions of dollars per year globally. Initiatives to reduce low-value imaging may reduce costs by up to 95% without harming patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first systematic review of the cost of low-value imaging worldwide, documenting a high potential for cost reduction. Given the universal challenges with resource allocation, the large amount used for low-value imaging represents a vast opportunity cost and offers great potential to improve the quality and efficiency of care.

Radiologists' Out-of-Network Billing Trends, 2007 to 2021.

PURPOSE: Given the financial hardships of surprise billing for patients, the aim of this study was to assess the degree to which radiologists effectively participate in commercial insurance networks by examining the trend in the share of radiologists' imaging claims that are out of network (OON). METHODS: A retrospective study over a 15-year period (2007-2021) was conducted using claims from Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart Database to assess the share of radiologists' imaging claims that are OON. Radiologists' annual OON rate was assessed overall as well as for claims associated with inpatient stays and emergency department (ED) visits. Rates were assessed for all imaging studies as well as by modality. Linear regression was conducted to assess OON rate time trends. RESULTS: From 2007 to 2021, 5,039,142 of radiologists' imaging claims (6.3%) were OON. This rate declined from 12.6% in 2007 to 1.1% in 2021. Over the study period, the OON rate was 5.0% during an inpatient stay and 2.1% on the same day as an ED visit that did not lead to an inpatient admission. The linear trend in the overall OON rate declined 0.74 percentage points annually (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.90 to -0.58 percentage points) over the study period. Likewise, the annual declines were 0.54 percentage points (95% CI, -0.71 to -0.36) and 0.26 percentage points (95% CI, -0.33 to -0.20 percentage points) for imaging claims associated with inpatient stays and ED visits, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Radiologists' imaging claims that are OON has significantly declined from 2007 to a minimal level in 2021. This may indicate effective negotiations between radiologists and commercial payers and new state-level surprise billing laws.

Evaluation of claims data from a commercial value-based insurance product shows pediatric imaging is not a major driver of overall or pediatric healthcare expenditures.

BACKGROUND: Initiatives to reduce healthcare expenditures often focus on imaging, suggesting that imaging is a major driver of cost. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate medical expenditures and determine if imaging was a major driver in pediatric as compared to adult populations. METHODS: We reviewed all claims data for members in a value-based contract between a commercial insurer and a healthcare system for calendar years 2021 and 2022. For both pediatric (<18 years of age) and adult populations, we analyzed average per member per year (PMPY) medical expenditures related to imaging as well as other categories of large medical expenses. Average PMPY expenditures were compared between adult and pediatric patients. RESULTS: Children made up approximately 20% of members and 21% of member months but only 8-9% of expenditures. Imaging expenditures in pediatric members were 0.2% of the total healthcare spend and 2.9% of total pediatric expenditures. Imaging expenditures per member were seven times greater in adults than children. The rank order of imaging expenditures and imaging modalities was also different in pediatric as compared to adult members. CONCLUSION: Evaluation of claims data from a commercial value-based insurance product shows that pediatric imaging is not a major driver of overall, nor pediatric only, healthcare expenditures.

Complex Billing for Nonemergency Outpatient Imaging: An Obstacle to the Success of Health Care Price Transparency Initiatives.

PURPOSE: Recent price transparency initiatives have considerable limitations, notably due to the complexity of health care products. A single care encounter often consists of several services that may be performed by numerous clinicians and health care facilities that bill independently. The objective of this study was to describe the complexity in billing for nonemergency, noninvasive outpatient imaging and its variation across care delivery settings and imaging modalities. METHODS: Using billing records from the 2019 IBM MarketScan Commercial Database, the authors examined the number of billing entities involved in outpatient imaging encounters and the sets of relevant items and services for which patients were billed. RESULTS: In total, 5,210,129 imaging encounters were analyzed. Patients received bills from multiple billing entities for 70.9% of hospital-based encounters, 4.5% of office-based encounters, and 7.6% of encounters at imaging centers. Contrast agent was billed separately from the imaging procedures in 55.9%, 71.5%, and 55.3% of encounters for contrast imaging at hospitals, offices, and imaging centers, respectively. Billing for other ancillary items and services (facility fees, 3-D reconstruction, anesthesia and sedation) was relatively rare. CONCLUSIONS: Two key aspects of billing complexity may make obtaining complete and reliable price estimates before receiving outpatient imaging difficult for patients: the number of billing entities involved in care delivery and billing for fees and ancillary services beyond the primary imaging procedure. Given that price transparency initiatives are aimed primarily at helping patients anticipate the total cost of their care, policymakers, payers, and providers should take additional steps to provide patients with reliable information on the prices of entire care experiences.

The cost, survival, and quality-of-life implications of guideline-discordant imaging for prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for incident prostate cancer staging imaging have been widely circulated and accepted as best practice since 1996. Despite these clear guidelines, wasteful and potentially harmful inappropriate imaging of men with prostate cancer remains prevalent. AIM: To understand changing population-level patterns of imaging among men with incident prostate cancer, we created a state-transition microsimulation model based on existing literature and incident prostate cancer cases. METHODS: To create a cohort of patients, we identified incident prostate cancer cases from 2004 to 2009 that were diagnosed in men ages 65 and older from SEER. A microsimulation model allowed us to explore how this cohort's survival, quality of life, and Medicare costs would be impacted by making imaging consistent with guidelines. We conducted a probabilistic analysis as well as one-way sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: When only imaging high-risk men compared to the status quo, we found that the population rate of imaging dropped from 53 to 38% and average per-person spending on imaging dropped from $236 to $157. The discounted and undiscounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios indicated that ideal upfront imaging reduced costs and slightly improved health outcomes compared with current practice patterns, that is, guideline-concordant imaging was less costly and slightly more effective. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the potential reduction in cost through the correction of inappropriate imaging practices. These findings highlight an opportunity within the healthcare system to reduce unnecessary costs and overtreatment through guideline adherence.

Current Interventional Radiology-Related Benchmarked Clinical Quality Measures Are Less Likely to be "Capped" Than Diagnostic Radiology Clinical Quality Measures.

In the merit-based incentive payment system (MIPS), quality measures are considered topped out if national median performance rates are ≥95%. Quality measures worth 10 points can be capped at 7 points if topped out for ≥2 years. This report compares the availability of diagnostic radiology (DR)-related and interventional radiology (IR)-related measures worth 10 points. A total of 196 MIPS clinical quality measures were reviewed on the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services MIPS website. There are significantly more IR-related measures worth 10 points than DR measures (2/9 DR measures vs 9/12 IR measures; P = .03), demonstrating that clinical IR services can help mixed IR/DR groups maximize their Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services payment adjustment.

Costs Associated With Imaging Surveillance After Treatment for Head and Neck Cancer.

Importance: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommends imaging within 6 months after treatment for head and neck cancer (HNC). Further imaging is recommended only if the patient has symptoms or abnormal findings on physical examination. However, in many instances, asymptomatic patients continue to have imaging evaluations. Objectives: To assess practice patterns in surveillance imaging in patients with HNC and evaluate the costs associated with these imaging practices. Design, Setting, and Participants: This single-institution retrospective economic evaluation study screened 435 patients to identify patients newly diagnosed with head and neck mucosal and salivary gland malignant tumors between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2016. Data analyses were performed from October 25, 2018, to November 24, 2020. Exposure: Imaging practice patterns. Main Outcomes and Measures: Number and costs of imaging studies during the surveillance period for all patients, patients who remained disease free, and patients who developed recurrence. Results: A total of 136 patients (mean [SD] age at diagnosis, 62 [14] years; 84 [61.8%] male; 106 [77.9%] White) with HNC were included in the study. The oropharynx was the most common subsite (64 [47.1%]), most HNCs were stage IVA (62 [45.6%]), and most patients received definitive radiation-based treatment (71 [52.2%]). During the median surveillance period of 3.2 years (range, 0.3-6.8 years), a mean (SD) of 14 (10) imaging studies were performed for all patients, with a mean (SD) total cost of $36 800 ($24 500). In patients who remained disease free, a mean (SD) of 13 (10) imaging studies were performed during the surveillance period, with a mean (SD) total cost of $35 000 ($21 700). Patients who lacked symptoms had a mean (SD) of 4 (3) studies performed per year, resulting in a mean cost of $9600 ($5900) per year. Patients who developed recurrence had more studies per year of follow-up (mean difference, 5.0; 95% CI, 3.4-6.6) and higher associated mean costs (mean difference, $10 600; 95% CI, $6100-$15 000) than patients who remained disease free. Conclusions and Relevance: In this economic evaluation study, many patients treated for HNCs received imaging studies beyond what is recommended by National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. These findings suggest that the cost burden of imaging in the asymptomatic patient needs to be considered against the value obtained from routine imaging in this current health care environment.

When More Is Better: Underused Advanced Imaging Exams That Can Improve Outcomes and Reduce Cost of Care.

Appropriate use of resources is a tenet of care transformation efforts, with a national campaign to reduce low-value imaging. The next level of performance improvement is to bolster evidence-based screening, imaging surveillance, and diagnostic innovation, which can avert more costly, higher-risk elements of unnecessary care like emergent interventions. Clinical scenarios in which underused advanced imaging can improve outcomes and reduce total cost of care are reviewed, including abdominal aortic aneurysm surveillance, coronary artery disease diagnosis, and renal mass characterization. Reliable abdominal aortic aneurysm surveillance imaging reduces emergency surgery and can be driven by radiologists incorporating best practice standardized recommendations in imaging interpretations. Coronary computed tomography angiography in patients with stable and unstable chest pain can reduce downstream resource use while improving outcomes. Preoperative 99mTc-sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) reliably distinguishes oncocytoma from renal cell carcinoma to obviate unnecessary nephrectomy. As technological advances in diagnostic, molecular, and interventional radiology improve our ability to detect and cure disease, analyses of cost effectiveness will be critical to radiology leadership and sustainability in the transition to a value-based reimbursement model.

Medical imaging and nuclear medicine: a Lancet Oncology Commission.

The diagnosis and treatment of patients with cancer requires access to imaging to ensure accurate management decisions and optimal outcomes. Our global assessment of imaging and nuclear medicine resources identified substantial shortages in equipment and workforce, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). A microsimulation model of 11 cancers showed that the scale-up of imaging would avert 3·2% (2·46 million) of all 76·0 million deaths caused by the modelled cancers worldwide between 2020 and 2030, saving 54·92 million life-years. A comprehensive scale-up of imaging, treatment, and care quality would avert 9·55 million (12·5%) of all cancer deaths caused by the modelled cancers worldwide, saving 232·30 million life-years. Scale-up of imaging would cost US$6·84 billion in 2020-30 but yield lifetime productivity gains of $1·23 trillion worldwide, a net return of $179·19 per $1 invested. Combining the scale-up of imaging, treatment, and quality of care would provide a net benefit of $2·66 trillion and a net return of $12·43 per $1 invested. With the use of a conservative approach regarding human capital, the scale-up of imaging alone would provide a net benefit of $209·46 billion and net return of $31·61 per $1 invested. With comprehensive scale-up, the worldwide net benefit using the human capital approach is $340·42 billion and the return per dollar invested is $2·46. These improved health and economic outcomes hold true across all geographical regions. We propose actions and investments that would enhance access to imaging equipment, workforce capacity, digital technology, radiopharmaceuticals, and research and training programmes in LMICs, to produce massive health and economic benefits and reduce the burden of cancer globally.

Pre-operative imaging workup for surgical intervention in primary hyperparathyroidism: A tertiary referral center experience.

PURPOSE: Preoperative imaging in patients with primary hyperparathyroidism provides important localization information, allowing the surgeon to perform a focused surgery. However there are no evidence-based guidelines suggesting which preoperative imaging should be used, resulting in a risk of excessive prescription of exams and waste of economic resources. The main purpose of this study was to describe our experience on the performance of various imaging techniques for the preoperative localization of abnormal parathyroid gland/s, with a focus on the sensitivity and specificity of each technique. Secondly, we carried out an analysis of the cost utility of each technique in order to determine the most clinical and cost-effective combination of localization studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Records of 336 patients who underwent parathyroidectomy were retrospectively examined comparing imaging and intraoperative/histopathologic findings to evaluate the accuracy in parathyroid detection of each imaging technique. Costs were determined by regional health system reimbursement. RESULTS: We found that the sensitivity of color Doppler US was significantly higher than SPECT (p 0,023), while the sensitivity of 4D-CT was significantly better than US (p 0,029) and SPECT (p 0,0002). CONCLUSIONS: In experienced hands color Doppler US is a highly sensitive technique especially in patients with no thyroid diseases. In patients with concomitant thyroid pathology, the combination of US and 4D-CT represents a reliable localization technique.

Perioperative cost evaluation of canal wall down mastoidectomy.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate perioperative costs of canal wall-down (CWD) mastoidectomy as an initial surgery compared to revision surgery following initial canal wall-up (CWU) mastoidectomy. METHODS: This study is a retrospective chart review of adult patients who underwent CWD mastoidectomy for chronic otitis media with or without cholesteatoma at a tertiary referral center. Patients were divided into groups that had previous CWU surgery and were undergoing revision CWD and those that were having an initial CWD mastoidectomy. Cost variables including previous surgeries, imaging costs, audiometric testing, and post-operative visits were compared between the two groups using t-test analysis. RESULTS: There was no significant difference with regards to the cost of post-operative visits, peri-operative imaging, or revision surgeries between the two groups. Hearing outcomes based on mean speech reception threshold (SRT) were not statistically different between the two groups (p = 0.087). There was a significant difference in total cost with the revision group having a higher mean cost by $6967.84, most of which was accounted for by the difference in the cost of the previous surgeries of $6488.53. CONCLUSIONS: The revision CWD surgery group had increased total cost that could be attributed to the cost of previous surgery. Increased peri-operative cost was not noted with the initial CWD surgery group for any individual variables examined. Initial CWD mastoidectomy should be considered in the proper patient population to help decrease healthcare costs.

Effect of extended scope physiotherapists assessments in orthopaedic diagnostic setting: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Patients with musculoskeletal diseases can potentially be assessed by an extended scope physiotherapist (ESP) instead of by an orthopaedic surgeon (OS). OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of the diagnostic musculoskeletal assessment performed by ESP compared to OS. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro and reference lists of included studies and previous reviews were searched in November 2015. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies were included if they evaluated adults with a musculoskeletal disease referred to an outpatient orthopaedic clinic where a diagnostic assessment had been conducted by an ESP. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted using a customised data extraction sheet. Two reviewers using checklists evaluated methodological independently. RESULTS: We included one randomised controlled trial and 31 observational studies. Diagnostic agreement between ESPs and OSs was 65 to 100% across studies. Health care cost savings for diagnostic assessments performed by ESPs were 27 to 49% compared to OSs. Overall, 77 to 100% of the patients were satisfied with the ESP assessment. Results were comparable on diagnostic agreement, cost and satisfaction in studies with high, moderate and low risk of bias. LIMITATIONS: Risk of bias in the included studies. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATION OF KEY FINDINGS: Diagnostic assessments performed by ESP may be as beneficial as or even better than assessment performed by OSs in terms diagnostic agreement, costs and satisfaction. However, the methodological quality was generally too low to determine the clear effectiveness of ESP assessment, and more high quality studies are needed. Systematic review registration number: PROSPERO CRD42014014229.

Cost-effectiveness of consensus guideline based management of pancreatic cysts: The sensitivity and specificity required for guidelines to be cost-effective.

BACKGROUND: Detection of cystic lesions of the pancreas has outpaced our ability to stratify low-grade cystic lesions from those at greater risk for pancreatic cancer, raising a concern for overtreatment. METHODS: We developed a Markov decision model to determine the cost-effectiveness of guideline-based management for asymptomatic pancreatic cysts. Incremental costs per quality-adjusted life year gained and survival were calculated for current management guidelines. A sensitivity analysis estimated the effect on cost-effectiveness and mortality if overtreatment of low-grade cysts is avoided, and the sensitivity and specificity thresholds required of methods of cyst stratification to improve costs expended. RESULTS: "Surveillance" using current management guidelines had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $171,143/quality adjusted life year compared with no surveillance or operative treatment ("do nothing"). An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for surveillance decreases to $80,707/quality adjusted life year if the operative overtreatment of low-grade cysts was avoided. Assuming a societal willingness-to-pay of $100,000/quality adjusted life year, the diagnostic specificity for high-risk cysts must be >67% for surveillance to be preferred over surgery and "do nothing." Changes in sensitivity alone cannot make surveillance cost-effective. Most importantly, survival in surveillance is worse than "do nothing" for 3 years after cyst diagnosis, although long-term survival is improved. The disadvantage is eliminated when overtreatment of low-grade cysts is avoided. CONCLUSION: Current management of pancreatic cystic lesions is not cost-effective and may increase mortality owing to overtreatment of low-grade cysts. The specificity for risk stratification for high-risk cysts must be greater than 67% to make surveillance cost-effective.

What determines diagnostic resource consumption in emergency medicine: patients, physicians or context?

OBJECTIVES: A major cause for concern about increasing ED visits is that ED care is expensive. Recent research suggests that ED resource consumption is affected by patients' health status, varies between physicians and is context dependent. The aim of this study is to determine the relative proportion of characteristics of the patient, the physician and the context that contribute to ED resource consumption. METHODS: Data on patients, physicians and the context were obtained in a prospective observational cohort study of patients hospitalised to an internal medicine ward through the ED of the University Hospital Bern, Switzerland, between August and December 2015. Diagnostic resource consumption in the ED was modelled through a multilevel mixed effects linear regression. RESULTS: In total, 473 eligible patients seen by one of 38 physicians were included in the study. Diagnostic resource consumption heavily depends on physicians' ratings of case difficulty (p<0.001, z-standardised regression coefficient: 147.5, 95% CI 87.3 to 207.7) and-less surprising-on patients' acuity (p<0.001, 126.0, 95% CI 65.5 to 186.6). Neither the physician per se, nor their experience, the patients' chronic health status or the context seems to have a measurable impact (all p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic resource consumption in the ED is heavily affected by physicians' situational confidence. Whether we should aim at altering physician confidence ultimately depends on its calibration with accuracy.

Characteristics of COVID-19 Community Practice Declines in Noninvasive Diagnostic Imaging Professional Work.

PURPOSE: The operational and financial impact of the widespread coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) curtailment of imaging services on radiology practices is unknown. We aimed to characterize recent COVID-19-related community practice noninvasive diagnostic imaging professional work declines. METHODS: Using imaging metadata from nine community radiology practices across the United States between January 2019 and May 2020, we mapped work relative value unit (wRVU)-weighted stand-alone noninvasive diagnostic imaging service codes to both modality and body region. Weekly 2020 versus 2019 wRVU changes were analyzed by modality, body region, and site of service. Practice share χ2 testing was performed. RESULTS: Aggregate weekly wRVUs ranged from a high of 120,450 (February 2020) to a low of 55,188 (April 2020). During that -52% wRVU nadir, outpatient declines were greatest (-66%). All practices followed similar aggregate trends in the distribution of wRVUs between each 2020 versus 2019 week (P = .96-.98). As a percentage of total all-practice wRVUs, declines in CT (20,046 of 63,992; 31%) and radiography and fluoroscopy (19,196; 30%) were greatest. By body region, declines in abdomen and pelvis (16,203; 25%) and breast (12,032; 19%) imaging were greatest. Mammography (-17%) and abdominal and pelvic CT (-14%) accounted for the largest shares of total all-practice wRVU reductions. Across modality-region groups, declines were far greatest for mammography (-92%). CONCLUSIONS: Substantial COVID-19-related diagnostic imaging work declines were similar across community practices and disproportionately impacted mammography. Decline patterns could facilitate pandemic second wave planning. Overall implications for practice workflows, practice finances, patient access, and payment policy are manifold.

Development of a method to determine the cost of breast cancer treatment with chemotherapy at Groote Schuur Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa.

BACKGROUND: There has been no comprehensive study determining the financial burden of breast cancer in the South African (SA) public sector. OBJECTIVES: To develop a method to determine the cost of breast cancer treatment with chemotherapy per episode of care and to quantify the associated costs relating to chemotherapy at Groote Schuur Hospital (GSH), a government hospital in SA. These costs included costs associated with the management of adverse events arising from chemotherapy. METHODS: Retrospective patient-level data were collected for 200 patients from electronic databases and patient folders between 2013 and 2015. Direct medical costs were determined from the health funder's perspective. The information collected was categorised into the following cost components: chemotherapy medicines, support medicines, administration of chemotherapy, laboratory tests, radiology scans and imaging, doctor consultations and adverse events. Time-and-motion studies were conducted on a set of new patients and the data obtained were used for the study sample of 200 patients. All the above costs were used to determine the cost of chemotherapy per episode of care. The episode of care was defined as the care provided from 2 months prior to the date of commencing chemotherapy (pre-chemotherapy phase), during chemotherapy (treatment phase) and until 6 months after the date when the last cycle of chemotherapy was administered (follow-up phase). RESULTS: A method was developed to determine the episode-of-care costs for breast cancer at GSH. The total direct medical cost for treatment of breast cancer at GSH for 200 patients was ZAR3 154 877, and the average episode-of-care cost per patient was ZAR15 774. The average cost of management of adverse events arising from the various treatment modalities was ZAR13 133 per patient. It was found that the cost of treating a patient with adverse events was 1.8 times higher than the cost of treating a patient without adverse events. Of the patients, 86.5% managed to complete their prescribed chemotherapy treatment cycles, and the average cost of treatment of these patients was 1.3 times more than the average cost for patients who could not complete their treatment, based on the number of treatment cycles received. CONCLUSION: A comprehensive method to determine the costs associated with breast cancer management per episode of care was developed, and costs were quantified at GSH according to the treatment protocol used at the hospital.

Insurance Denials of Care Amount to Unlicensed Medical Practice.

DISCLOSURES: No funding supported the writing of this article. The author has nothing to disclose.