Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Diagnostic Radiology | Statement

Radiology in the era of value-based healthcare: a multi-society expert statement from the ACR, CAR, ESR, IS3R, RANZCR, and RSNA

Authors: Adrian P. Brady, Jaqueline A. Bello, Lorenzo E. Derchi, Michael Fuchsjäger, Stacy Goergen, Gabriel P. Krestin, Emil J. Y. Lee, David C. Levin, Josephine Pressacco, Vijay M. Rao, John Slavotinek, Jacob J. Visser, Richard E. A. Walker, James A. Brink

Published in: Insights into Imaging | Issue 1/2020

Abstract

Background

The Value-Based Healthcare (VBH) concept is designed to improve individual healthcare outcomes without increasing expenditure, and is increasingly being used to determine resourcing of and reimbursement for medical services. Radiology is a major contributor to patient and societal healthcare at many levels. Despite this, some VBH models do not acknowledge radiology’s central role; this may have future negative consequences for resource allocation.

Methods, findings and interpretation

This multi-society paper, representing the views of Radiology Societies in Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, describes the place of radiology in VBH models and the healthcare value contributions of radiology. Potential steps to objectify and quantify the value contributed by radiology to healthcare are outlined.

Brady A, Brink J, Slavotinek J (2020) Radiology and value-based healthcare. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.14930CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

European Society of Radiology (ESR) (2017) ESR concept paper on value-based radiology. Insights Imaging 8:447–454

Jones DN, Thomas MJW, Mandel CJ et al (2010) Where failures occur in the imaging care cycle: lessons from the radiology event register. J Am Coll Radiol 7:593–602CrossRef

Tsevat J, Moriates C (2018) Value-based health care meets cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann Intern Med 169(5):329–332. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0342CrossRefPubMed

Roberts ET, Zaslavsky AM, McWilliams JM (2018) The value-based payment modifier: program outcomes and implications for disparities. Ann Intern Med 168:255–265. https://doi.org/10.7326/M17-1740CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

European Commission Expert Panel on Effective Ways of Investing in Health (2019) Draft opinion paper on “Defining Value in ‘value-based healthcare’”. https://ec.europa.eu/health/expert_panel/sites/expertpanel/files/024_valuebasedhealthcare_en.pdf

Porter ME (2010) What is value in health care? N Engl J Med 363:2477–2481CrossRef

Henzler T, Gruettner J, Meyer M et al (2013) Coronary computed tomography and triple rule out CT in patients with acute chest pain and intermediate cardiac risk for acute coronary syndrome: part 2: economic aspects. Eur J Radiol 82(1):106–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.06.012CrossRefPubMed

Truong QA, Schulman-Marcus J, Zakroysky P et al (2016) Coronary CT angiography versus standard emergency department evaluation for acute chest pain and diabetic patients: Is there benefit with early coronary CT angiography? Results of the randomized comparative effectiveness RMICAT II Trial. J Am Heart Assoc 5(3):e003137. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.115.003137CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Brady AP (2017) Error and discrepancy in radiology—inevitable or avoidable? Insights Imaging 8:171–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-016-0534-1CrossRefPubMed

11.

Fryback DG, Thornbury JR (1991) The efficacy of diagnostic imaging. Med Decis Making 11(2):88–94CrossRef

12.

US CMS quality payment program. https://qpp.cms.gov

13.

Gunderman RB, Boland GWL (2009) Value in radiology. Radiology 253:597–599CrossRef

14.

Rao VM, Levin DC (2011) The value-added services of hospital-based radiology groups. J Am Coll Radiol 8:626–630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2011.03.007CrossRefPubMed

15.

Gazelle GS, Kessler L, Lee DW et al (2011) A framework for assessing the value of diagnostic imaging in the era of comparative effectiveness research. Radiology 261(3):692–698CrossRef

16.

Seidel D, Frank RA, Schmidt S (2016) The evidence value matrix for diagnostic imaging. J Am Coll Radiol 13(10):1253–1259CrossRef

17.

Rubin GD (2017) Costing in radiology and health care: rationale, relativity, rudiments, and realities. Radiology 282:333–347CrossRef

18.

Kocher KE, Meurer WJ, Desmond JS, Nallamothu BK (2012) Effect of testing and treatment on emergency department length of stay using a national database. Acad Emerg Med 19(5):525–534CrossRef

19.

Larson DB, Durand DJ, Siegel DS (2017) Understanding and applying the concept of value creation in radiology. J Am Coll Radiol 14:549–557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2016.12.023CrossRefPubMed

20.

University of Utah, State of Value in US Health Care (2017) Uofuhealth.org/valuesurvey 10. Bhandari, Abdi, and Thy Dinh. The Value of Radiology in Canada. Ottawa: The Conference Board of Canada, 2017

21.

Lysack JT, Hoy M, Hudon ME et al (2013) Impact of neuroradiologist second opinion on staging and management of head and neck cancer. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 42:39. https://doi.org/10.1186/1916-0216-42-39CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

O’Connor JP, Aboagye EO, Adams JE et al (2017) Imaging biomarker roadmap for cancer studies. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 14(3):169–186. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2016.162CrossRefPubMed

23.

Brady AP (2011) Measuring consultant radiologist workload: method and results from a national survey. Insights Imaging 2:247–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-011-0094-3CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Sarwar A, Boland G, Monks A, Kruskal JB (2015) Metrics for radiologists in the era of value-based health care delivery. Radiographics 35(3):866–876CrossRef

25.

European Society of Radiology. https://www.myesr.org/esriguide

26.

American College of Radiology. https://www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/ACR-Appropriateness-Criteria

27.

https://choosingwiselycanada.org. Accessed 20 Aug 2020

28.

https://www.choosingwisely.org. Accessed 20 Aug 2020

29.

Duong PA, Bresnahan B, Pastel DA et al (2016) Value of imaging part II: value beyond image interpretation. Acad Radiol 23:23–29CrossRef

30.

Sardanelli F (2017) Trends in radiology and experimental research. Eur Radiol Exp. 1(1):1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41747-017-0006-5CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

ACR’s Imaging 3.0 Program. https://www.acr.org/Practice-Management-Quality-Informatics/Imaging-3

32.

RSNA Radiology Cares Program. https://www.rsna.org/practice-tools/patient-centered-care

33.

Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists. https://www.insideradiology.com.au

Title: Radiology in the era of value-based healthcare: a multi-society expert statement from the ACR, CAR, ESR, IS3R, RANZCR, and RSNA
Authors: Adrian P. Brady
Jaqueline A. Bello
Lorenzo E. Derchi
Michael Fuchsjäger
Stacy Goergen
Gabriel P. Krestin
Emil J. Y. Lee
David C. Levin
Josephine Pressacco
Vijay M. Rao
John Slavotinek
Jacob J. Visser
Richard E. A. Walker
James A. Brink
Publication date: 01-12-2020
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keyword: Diagnostic Radiology
Published in: Insights into Imaging / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1869-4101
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-020-00941-z

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Radiology in the era of value-based healthcare: a multi-society expert statement from the ACR, CAR, ESR, IS3R, RANZCR, and RSNA

Abstract

Background

Methods, findings and interpretation

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods, findings and interpretation

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

Subspecialized radiological reporting reduces radiology report turnaround time

MRI characterization of focal liver lesions in non-cirrhotic patients: assessment of added value of gadoxetic acid-enhanced hepatobiliary phase imaging

Prevalence and risk factors for lung involvement on low-dose chest CT (LDCT) in a paucisymptomatic population of 247 patients affected by COVID-19

Diagnostic Reference Levels based on clinical indications in computed tomography: a literature review

Integrative radiogenomics for virtual biopsy and treatment monitoring in ovarian cancer

Artefacts in contrast enhanced digital mammography: how can they affect diagnostic image quality and confuse clinical diagnosis?