Summary: Simple arithmetic dictates that a $500 MRI scan cannot include
all of the following: state-of-the-art equipment and a technologist
engaged for thirty minutes, contrast media 30% of the time, and
physician supervision and interpretation.
Payers are aware that MRI centers must reduce costs to match
available pa
Simple arithmetic dictates that a $500 MRI scan cannot include
all of the following: state-of-the-art equipment and a technologist
engaged for thirty minutes, contrast media 30% of the time, and
physician supervision and interpretation.
Payers are aware that MRI centers must reduce costs to match
available payments, including restriction of services where the
standard of care is flexible. Federal (Medicare) and other payers'
reimbursement, made on behalf of their insured (patients), for
fixed technical costs effectively forces supervising radiologists
to remove the least important components of the MRI procedure.
The responsible practice of medicine includes remaining
economically viable to sustain the availability of MRI services in
the community. Local decisions must be made by MRI centers or
individual radiologists to refuse to provide what they believe to
be sub-standard care, to refuse certain contracts, or to go out of
business. Nevertheless, for common MRI services, we can closely
estimate the standard of care for millions of patients, as this is
largely determined by federal and state policies and reflected in
the community reimbursement level.
It is not at all clear whether the standard of care can be
adjusted patient-by-patient, or payer-by-payer. Cost shifting,
though questionable, is a historical factor which supports the
current level of care for many patients. Therefore, assuming a
single community standard of care, when the average global
reimbursement falls below $500, responsible radiologists must
consider the following:
1. Reducing the number of pulse sequences from current levels to
save time.
2. Reducing image resolution (quality) by using thicker slices,
gaps, coarser pixels, or fewer excitations.
3. Not providing expensive and inefficient on-site physician
coverage, instead relying on standard protocols backed-up by
selective patient call-backs.
4. Not providing physician coverage of contrast media
injections.
5. Not using contrast media in initial "screening" MRI
exams.
These conclusions seem inescapable and must be considered an
inherent part of the insured-payer-provider-patient continuum in
defining what is the standard of care for the individual patient,
payer, or community.
Dr. Stark is Professor and Chairman, Department of Radiology,
University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE; he is also a
member of the editorial advisory board of this journal. Dr. Kanal
is Associate Professor and Director of Clinical and Educational MR,
Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh. Dr. Bradley is
Professor of Radiology, University of California at Irvine, Orange,
CA, and Director of MRI, Long Beach Memorial Medical Center, Long
Beach, CA.