Searched for: in-biosketch:true
person:rosena23
Academic Radiologist Subspecialty Identification Using a Novel Claims-Based Classification System
Rosenkrantz, Andrew B; Wang, Wenyi; Hughes, Danny R; Ginocchio, Luke A; Rosman, David A; Duszak, Richard Jr
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study is to assess the feasibility of a novel claims-based classification system for payer identification of academic radiologist subspecialties. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a categorization scheme based on the Neiman Imaging Types of Service (NITOS) system, we mapped the Medicare Part B services billed by all radiologists from 2012 to 2014, assigning them to the following subspecialty categories: abdominal imaging, breast imaging, cardiothoracic imaging, musculoskeletal imaging, nuclear medicine, interventional radiology, and neuroradiology. The percentage of subspecialty work relative value units (RVUs) to total billed work RVUs was calculated for each radiologist nationwide. For radiologists at the top 20 academic departments funded by the National Institutes of Health, those percentages were compared with subspecialties designated on faculty websites. NITOS-based subspecialty assignments were also compared with the only radiologist subspecialty classifications currently recognized by Medicare (i.e., nuclear medicine and interventional radiology). RESULTS: Of 1012 academic radiologists studied, the median percentage of Medicare-billed NITOS-based subspecialty work RVUs matching the subspecialty designated on radiologists' own websites ranged from 71.3% (for nuclear medicine) to 98.9% (for neuroradiology). A NITOS-based work RVU threshold of 50% correctly classified 89.8% of radiologists (5.9% were not mapped to any subspecialty; subspecialty error rate, 4.2%). In contrast, existing Medicare provider codes identified only 46.7% of nuclear medicine physicians and 39.4% of interventional radiologists. CONCLUSION: Using a framework based on a recently established imaging health services research tool that maps service codes based on imaging modality and body region, Medicare claims data can be used to consistently identify academic radiologists by subspecialty in a manner not possible with the use of existing Medicare physician specialty identifiers. This method may facilitate more appropriate performance metrics for subspecialty academic physicians under emerging value-based payment models.
PMID: 28301213
ISSN: 1546-3141
CID: 2490072
Contextualizing the first-round failure of the AHCA: down but not out
Hirsch, Joshua A; Rosenkrantz, Andrew B; Nicola, Greg N; Harvey, H Benjamin; Duszak, Richard Jr; Silva, Ezequiel 3rd; Barr, Robert M; Klucznik, Richard P; Brook, Allan L; Manchikanti, Laxmaiah
On 8 November 2016 the American electorate voted Donald Trump into the Presidency and a majority of Republicans into both houses of Congress. Since many Republicans ran for elected office on the promise to 'repeal and replace' Obamacare, this election result came with an expectation that campaign rhetoric would result in legislative action on healthcare. The American Health Care Act (AHCA) represented the Republican effort to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Key elements of the AHCA included modifications of Medicaid expansion, repeal of the individual mandate, replacement of ACA subsidies with tax credits, and a broadening of the opportunity to use healthcare savings accounts. Details of the bill and the political issues which ultimately impeded its passage are discussed here.
PMID: 28559508
ISSN: 1759-8486
CID: 2581302
Changing Medicare Utilization of Minimally Invasive Procedures for the Treatment of Chronic Venous Insufficiency
Prabhakar, Anand M; Misono, Alexander S; Sheth, Rahul A; Rosenkrantz, Andrew B; Hemingway, Jennifer; Hughes, Danny R; Duszak, Richard Jr
PURPOSE: To examine changes in the utilization of procedures related to treatment of chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) in the Medicare population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Service-specific claims data for phlebectomy, sclerotherapy, and radiofrequency (RF) and laser ablation were identified by using Medicare Physician Supplier Procedure Summary master files from 2005 through 2014. Longitudinal national utilization rates were calculated by using annual Medicare enrollment data from 2005 through 2013. Procedure volumes by specialty group and site of service were analyzed. RESULTS: Total annual claims for these procedures in the Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries increased from 95,206 to 332,244 (Compound Annual Growth Rate [CAGR], 15%) between 2005 and 2014. Per 1,000 beneficiaries, overall utilization increased annually from 2.8 in 2005 to 9.4 in 2013. Most procedures were performed in the private office setting (92% in 2014). In 2014, radiologists had a 10% relative market share, compared with vascular surgeons, other surgeons, and cardiologists, who had 26%, 25%, and 14% market shares, respectively. Cardiologists had the fastest relative growth, with a CAGR of 51% compared with 23% for radiology, 12% for vascular surgery, and 13% for other surgery. Total venous RF ablation services grew with a CAGR of 31%, with radiology and cardiology growing most rapidly (40% and 79%, respectively). Total venous laser ablation services grew with a CAGR of 22%, with radiology growing 15% and cardiology growing most rapidly at 44%. CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of CVI procedures in the Medicare population increased markedly from 2005 through 2014. The overwhelming majority are performed in the private office setting by nonradiologists.
PMID: 28396193
ISSN: 1535-7732
CID: 2528162
Magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer
Bjurlin, Marc A; Rosenkrantz, Andrew B; Lepor, Herbert; Taneja, Samir S
PMCID:5503953
PMID: 28725575
ISSN: 2223-4691
CID: 2640102
Role of prostate magnetic resonance imaging in active surveillance
Meng, Xiaosong; Rosenkrantz, Andrew B; Taneja, Samir S
Active surveillance (AS) has emerged as a beneficial strategy for management of low risk prostate cancer (PCa) and prevention of overtreatment of indolent disease. However, selection of patients for AS using traditional 12-core transrectal prostate biopsy is prone to sampling error and presents a challenge for accurate risk stratification. In fact, around a third of men are upgraded on repeat biopsy which disqualifies them as appropriate AS candidates. This uncertainty affects adoption of AS among patients and physicians, leading to current AS protocols involving repetitive prostate biopsies and unclear triggers for progression to definitive treatment. Prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has the potential to overcome some of these limitations through localization of significant tumors in the prostate. In conjunction with MRI-targeted prostate biopsy, improved sampling and detection of clinically significant PCa can help streamline the process of selecting suitable men for AS and early exclusion of men who require definitive treatment. MRI can also help minimize the invasive nature of monitoring for disease progression while on AS. Men with stable MRI findings have high negative predictive value for Gleason upgrade on subsequently biopsy, suggesting that men may potentially be monitored by serial MRI examinations with biopsy reserved for significant changes on imaging. Targeted biopsy on AS also allows for specific sampling of concerning lesions, although further data is necessary to evaluate the relative contribution of systematic and targeted biopsy in detecting the 25-30% of men who progress on AS. Further research is also warranted to better understand the nature of clinically significant cancers that are missed on MRI and why certain men have progression of disease that is not visible on prostate MRI. Consensus is also needed over what constitutes progression on MRI, when prostate biopsy can be safely avoided, and how to best utilize this additional information in current AS protocols. Despite these challenges, prostate MRI, either alone or in conjunction with MRI-targeted prostate biopsy, has the potential to significantly improve our current AS paradigm and rates of AS adoption among patients moving forward.
PMCID:5503957
PMID: 28725586
ISSN: 2223-4691
CID: 2640112
MRI-fusion biopsy: the contemporary experience
Bjurlin, Marc A; Rosenkrantz, Andrew B; Taneja, Samir S
Advancements in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MRI-ultrasound (US)-fusion targeted biopsy have resulted in a paradigm shift in the diagnosis of prostate cancer by overcoming the limitations of systematic biopsy. Prebiopsy MRI and MRI-US-fusion biopsy results in an increased detection of clinically significant disease, reduction in the detection of indolent disease, and allows for tumor localization during targeted biopsy. With these advantages, we have adopted a prebiopsy MRI and MRI-US-fusion biopsy diagnostic care pathway for all men at risk for prostate cancer and have performed more than 1900 biopsies to date. Herein we present our institutional development of MRI-US-fusion biopsy and highlight our results in those men who have had a previous negative biopsy, no prior biopsy, and those with a prior cancer diagnosis who may be candidate for active surveillance. Risk stratification with biomarkers and nomograms may allow for further counseling on the need for biopsy and the risk of harboring clinically significant disease.
PMCID:5503954
PMID: 28725590
ISSN: 2223-4691
CID: 2640132
Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the prostate: An intraindividual assessment of the effect of temporal resolution on qualitative detection and quantitative analysis of histopathologically proven prostate cancer
Ream, Justin M; Doshi, Ankur M; Dunst, Diane; Parikh, Nainesh; Kong, Max X; Babb, James S; Taneja, Samir S; Rosenkrantz, Andrew B
PURPOSE: To assess the effects of temporal resolution (RT ) in dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) on qualitative tumor detection and quantitative pharmacokinetic parameters in prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective Institutional Review Board (IRB)-approved study included 58 men (64 +/- 7 years). They underwent 3T prostate MRI showing dominant peripheral zone (PZ) tumors (24 with Gleason >/= 4 + 3), prior to prostatectomy. Continuously acquired DCE utilizing GRASP (Golden-angle RAdial Sparse Parallel) was retrospectively reconstructed at RT of 1.4 sec, 3.7 sec, 6.0 sec, 9.7 sec, and 14.9 sec. A reader placed volumes-of-interest on dominant tumors and benign PZ, generating quantitative pharmacokinetic parameters (ktrans , ve ) at each RT . Two blinded readers assessed each RT for lesion presence, location, conspicuity, and reader confidence on a 5-point scale. Data were assessed by mixed-model analysis of variance (ANOVA), generalized estimating equation (GEE), and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. RESULTS: RT did not affect sensitivity (R1all : 69.0%-72.4%, all Padj = 1.000; R1GS>/=4 + 3 : 83.3-91.7%, all Padj = 1.000; R2all : 60.3-69.0%, all Padj = 1.000; R2GS>/=4 + 3 : 58.3%-79.2%, all Padj = 1.000). R1 reported greater conspicuity of GS >/= 4 + 3 tumors at RT of 1.4 sec vs. 14.9 sec (4.29 +/- 1.23 vs. 3.46 +/- 1.44; Padj = 0.029). No other tumor conspicuity pairwise comparison reached significance (R1all : 2.98-3.43, all Padj >/= 0.205; R2all : 2.57-3.19, all Padj >/= 0.059; R1GS>/=4 + 3 : 3.46-4.29, all other Padj >/= 0.156; R2GS>/=4 + 3 : 2.92-3.71, all Padj >/= 0.439). There was no effect of RT on reader confidence (R1all : 3.17-3.34, all Padj = 1.000; R2all : 2.83-3.19, all Padj >/= 0.801; R1GS>/=4 + 3 : 3.79-4.21, all Padj = 1.000; R2GS>/=4 + 3 : 3.13-3.79, all Padj = 1.000). ktrans and ve of tumor and benign tissue did not differ across RT (all adjusted P values [Padj ] = 1.000). RT did not significantly affect area under the curve (AUC) of Ktrans or ve for differentiating tumor from benign (all Padj = 1.000). CONCLUSION: Current PI-RADS recommendations for RT of 10 seconds may be sufficient, with further reduction to the stated PI-RADS preference of RT = 7 seconds offering no benefit in tumor detection or quantitative analysis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2016.
PMCID:5538355
PMID: 27649481
ISSN: 1522-2586
CID: 2254782
What Patients Think About Their Interventional Radiologists: Assessment Using a Leading Physician Ratings Website
Obele, Chika C; Duszak, Richard Jr; Hawkins, C Matthew; Rosenkrantz, Andrew B
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate patient satisfaction scores for interventional radiologists (IRs) across the United States using a leading physician ratings website. METHODS: The physician ratings website Healthgrades was manually queried for all 2,774 Medicare-participating self-designated IRs. All patient-reviewed IRs for whom the primary "likelihood of recommending to family and friends" field was scored were included, resulting in 781 included IRs. Physician characteristics were extracted from Medicare data sets. All available patient satisfaction scores (1 [poor] to 5 [excellent]: likelihood to recommend, ease of scheduling, office environment, staff friendliness, trust in physician's decisions, how well physician explains condition, how well physician listens and answers questions, whether physician spends appropriate time with patients) and wait times were extracted from Healthgrades. Associations among measures were explored. RESULTS: IRs' mean likelihood-to-recommend score was 4.3 +/- 1.2 (median, 5.0; 64.5% received a score of 5; 10.5% received scores < 3). Mean scores ranged from 4.4 to 4.5 for office-related factors and from 4.3 to 4.5 for physician-related factors. Likelihood-to-recommend scores showed substantial correlations with office-related factors (r = 0.738 to 0.780) and physician-related factors (r = 0.918 to 0.946). Likelihood to recommend was significantly higher for IRs with shorter wait times (P < .001) but was not associated with physician gender or geographic region (P = 0.370-0.791), nor was there any correlation with physician age, years since graduation, or group practice size (r = -0.089 to 0.096). CONCLUSIONS: Satisfaction scores on a leading physician ratings website generally range from very good to excellent for US IRs. Most patients leaving reviews are likely to recommend their own IRs to friends or family members. The likelihood to recommend is strongly associated with differences in wait times.
PMID: 28017529
ISSN: 1558-349x
CID: 2383462
Trends in Publications in Radiology Journals Designated as Relating to Patient-Centered Care
Rosenkrantz, Andrew B; Rawson, James V
PURPOSE: To assess trends in publications in radiology journals designated as dealing with patient-centered care. METHODS: PubMed was searched for articles in radiology journals for which the article's record referenced patient-centered/patient-centric care. Among these, original research articles were identified and assigned major themes. Trends were assessed descriptively. RESULTS: A total of 115 articles in radiology journals designated as dealing with patient-centered care were identified, including 40 original research articles. The number of articles annually ranged from 0 to 4 in 2000-2008, 5 to 9 in 2010-2012, 14 to 15 in 2013-2014, and 25 in 2015. Only four radiology journals had published more than one of the original research articles. Original research articles' most common themes were: optimization of patients' access to reports and images (n=7); patients' examination experience (5); image evaluation (n=4); radiologists meeting with patients (n=4); improving patients' knowledge of imaging (n=3); examination wait times/efficiency (n=3); examination utilization/appropriateness (n=3); and IT enhancements (n=3). A total of 13 of 40 original research articles solicited opinions from patients. One study involved patients in educating trainees regarding patient-centered care. No study involved patients in system-level decisions regarding health care design and delivery. CONCLUSION: Articles dealing with patient-centered care in radiology are increasing, though they remain concentrated in a limited number of journals. Though major themes included image/report access, patient experiences, and radiologists meeting with patients, many studies dealt with less clearly patient-centric topics such as examination interpretation, while inclusion of patients in systems design was lacking. Further research in radiology is encouraged to target a broader range of ideals of patient-centered care, such as diversity, autonomy, and compassion, and to incorporate greater patient engagement.
PMID: 28017275
ISSN: 1558-349x
CID: 2383412
The American College of Radiology Incidental Findings Committee Recommendations for Management of Incidental Lymph Nodes: A Single-Center Evaluation
Smereka, Paul; Doshi, Ankur M; Ream, Justin M; Rosenkrantz, Andrew B
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To assess the American College of Radiology Incidental Findings Committee's (ACR-IFC) recommendations for defining and following up abnormal incidental abdominopelvic lymph nodes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 59 lymph nodes satisfying ACR-IFC criteria as incidental (no malignancy or lymphoproliferative disorder) and with sufficient follow-up to classify as benign (biopsy, decreased size, >/=12-month stability) or malignant (biopsy, detection of primary malignancy combined with either fluorodeoxyglucose hyperactivity or increase in size of the node) were included. Two radiologists independently assessed nodes for suspicious features by ACR-IFC criteria (round with indistinct hilum, hypervascularity, necrosis, cluster >/=3 nodes, cluster >/=2 nodes in >/=2 stations, size >/=1 cm in retroperitoneum). Outcomes were assessed with attention to ACR-IFC's recommendation for initial 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 8.5% of nodes were malignant; 91.5% were benign. Two of six malignant nodes were stable at 3 to <6-month follow-up before diagnosis; diagnosis of four of five malignant nodes was facilitated by later development of non-nodal sites of tumor. A total of 13, 5, 8, and 9 nodes were deemed benign given a decrease at <3 months, 3-5 months, 6-11 months, or >/=12 months of follow-up. No ACR-IFC feature differentiated benign and malignant nodes (P = 0.164-1.0). A cluster >/=3 nodes was present in 88.1%-93.2% of nodes. A total of 96.6%-98.3% had >/=1 suspicious feature for both readers. Necrosis and hypervascularity were not identified in any node. CONCLUSIONS: ACR-IFC imaging features overwhelmingly classified incidental nodes as abnormal, although did not differentiate benign and malignant nodes. Nodes stable at the ACR-IFC's advised initial 3-month follow-up were occasionally proven malignant or decreased on further imaging. Refinement of imaging criteria to define nodes of particularly high risk, integrated with other clinical criteria, may help optimize the follow-up of incidental abdominopelvic lymph nodes.
PMID: 28169142
ISSN: 1878-4046
CID: 2437382