Radiologists have the potential to add value instead of cost to the health care system in new imaging partnership ventures.
The radiology literature is replete with reports of imaging
overutilization by self-referring physicians. This issue has waxed
and waned over the years, producing a strong case against referring
physician ownership of imaging technology, federal statutes
designed to curb the abuse (and loopholes to circumvent them), and
a steady stream of grumbling from radiologists concerned about turf
incursions. The grumbling has grown to an outcry as this phenomenon
is felt by radiologists in cities, towns, and rural areas across
America.
This is happening as imaging utilization in general is on the
rise, a situation not lost on elected officials and policy makers
in Washington. Nancy-Ann DeParle, appointed last summer to the
Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC), advised the National
Coalition for Quality in Diagnostic Imaging Services (NCQDIS) board
members to prepare for an era of heightened public scrutiny.
MedPAC, created by Congress to advise it on Medicare policy issues,
recently analyzed Medicare claims data from 1999 through 2002 and
discovered that of all four categories of physician services
(evaluation and management, imaging, procedures, and tests),
imaging led the pack in average annual growth at 9%. The overall
annual growth rate for all services was 3.6%.
Imaging is on the rise for many reasons: new and improved
technology is providing better information; a lethal medicolegal
environment is unforgiving of physician error; and a rapidly
evolving menu of new drugs and treatments are providing physicians
with the tools to treat what the imaging technology can detect. A
radiologist recently told me that the emergency physicians produced
by today's medical schools seem not to have the intuitive skills of
their predecessors, and, instead, instinctively reach for the
imaging order pad. Could it be that we are in the midst of a
paradigm change in medicine in which referring physicians dispense
with intuition in favor of the power of knowing that imaging can
provide?
One can only speculate about how much of this increase in
imaging can be attributed to inappropriate studies performed on
in-office technology by self-referring physicians. What is known is
that more in-office imaging is being performed by self-referring
physicians. They have their reasons: financial gain and patient
convenience, both of which are compelling.
How many of those besieged down through the ages have had to
answer that most difficult question (whose outcome very well could
have grave consequences, at least for life as he or she knows it):
Shall I fight to the finish or strike a deal? Enter the new models
in radiology ventures in which radiologists increasingly are
partnering with orthopedists, cardiologists, oncologists, and
others in joint ventures. These arrangements make a good deal of
sense: the specialist provides the patients and the radiologist
provides the readings, and ensures proper care and maintenance of
the technology. The risk and the rewards are shared.
As radiology enters into a greater number of partnerships with
specialists who want to own the imaging technology, it is incumbent
on radiologists to bring some discipline to these arrangements.
Radiology has an opportunity to add real value for the patient, the
referrer, and the health care system by collaborating with their
partners to establish care protocols and examination criteria that
will ensure that every examination is appropriate. Without
attention to utilization management, radiologists could find
themselves in the uncomfortable position of aiding and abetting the
burdening of the health care system with unnecessary costs.
Cheryl Proval
cproval@medpubs.com