National trends in oncologic diagnostic imaging Journal Article


Authors: Rosenkrantz, A. B.; Chaves Cerdas, L.; Hughes, D. R.; Recht, M. P.; Nass, S. J.; Hricak, H.
Article Title: National trends in oncologic diagnostic imaging
Abstract: Objective: To characterize national trends in oncologic imaging (OI) utilization. Methods: This retrospective cross-sectional study used 2004 and 2016 CMS 5% Carrier Claims Research Identifiable Files. Radiologist-performed, primary noninvasive diagnostic imaging examinations were identified from billed Current Procedural Terminology codes; CT, MRI, and PET/CT examinations were categorized as “advanced” imaging. OI examinations were identified from imaging claims’ primary International Classification of Diseases-9 and International Classification of Diseases-10 codes. Imaging services were stratified by academic practice status and place of service. State-level correlations of oncologic advanced imaging utilization (examinations per 1,000 beneficiaries) with cancer prevalence and radiologist supply were assessed by Spearman correlation coefficient. Results: The national Medicare sample included 5,051,095 diagnostic imaging examinations (1,220,224 of them advanced) in 2004 and 5,023,115 diagnostic imaging examinations (1,504,608 of them advanced) in 2016. In 2004 and 2016, OI represented 4.3% and 3.9%, respectively, of all imaging versus 10.8% and 9.5%, respectively, of advanced imaging. The percentage of advanced OI done in academic practices rose from 18.8% in 2004 to 34.1% in 2016, leaving 65.9% outside academia. In 2016, 58.0% of advanced OI was performed in the hospital outpatient setting and 23.9% in the physician office setting. In 2016, state-level oncologic advanced imaging utilization correlated with state-level radiologist supply (r = +0.489, P < .001) but not with state-level cancer prevalence (r = −0.139, P = .329). Discussion: OI usage varied between practice settings. Although the percentage of advanced OI done in academic settings nearly doubled from 2004 to 2016, the majority remained in nonacademic practices. State-level oncologic advanced imaging utilization correlated with radiologist supply but not cancer prevalence. © 2020 American College of Radiology
Keywords: adult; treatment outcome; major clinical study; cancer patient; cancer staging; nuclear magnetic resonance imaging; cancer diagnosis; prevalence; diagnostic imaging; retrospective study; health care utilization; medicare; emergency ward; radiologist; outpatient department; health services research; trend study; radiodiagnosis; non invasive procedure; massachusetts; utilization; oncologic imaging; human; article; district of columbia; tertiary care center; current procedural terminology; rhode island; x-ray computed tomography; positron emission tomography-computed tomography; advanced imaging; new mexico; arkansas; delaware; kansas; nevada; south dakota; vermont; wyoming
Journal Title: Journal of the American College of Radiology
Volume: 17
Issue: 9
ISSN: 1546-1440
Publisher: Elsevier Science, Inc.  
Date Published: 2020-09-01
Start Page: 1116
End Page: 1122
Language: English
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2020.06.001
PUBMED: 32640248
PROVIDER: scopus
PMCID: PMC7483645
DOI/URL:
Notes: Article -- Export Date: 1 September 2020 -- Source: Scopus
Altmetric
Citation Impact
BMJ Impact Analytics
MSK Authors
  1. Hedvig Hricak
    421 Hricak