Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Saini, S.
Right arrow Articles by Thrall, J. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Saini, S.
Right arrow Articles by Thrall, J. H.
(Radiology. 2000;216:269-272.)
© RSNA, 2000

Health Policy and Practice

Technical Cost of Radiologic Examinations: Analysis across Imaging Modalities1

Sanjay Saini, MD, MBA, Steven E. Seltzer, MD, Robert T. Bramson, MD, Leonard A. Levine, MSIE, Pauline Kelly, Patrick F. Jordan, MBA, Brian F. Chiango, MBA and James H. Thrall, MD

1 From the Department of Radiology, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, 32 Fruit St, Boston, MA 02114 (S.S., R.T.B., L.A.L., P.F.J., J.H.T.), and the Department of Radiology, Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Mass (S.E.S., P.K., B.F.C.). From the 1997 RSNA scientific assembly. Received June 7, 1999; revision requested July 29; final revision received October 27; accepted November 16. Supported in part by Partners Healthcare System. Address correspondence to S.S. (e-mail: saini.sanjay@mgh.harvard.edu).

PURPOSE: To determine the individual technical costs of general diagnostic radiographic, ultrasonographic (US), computed tomographic (CT), magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, and scintigraphic examinations and interventional radiology.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Radiology Cost and Productivity Benchmarking Study method of the University HealthSystem Consortium, a cooperative group of academic medical centers, was modified and extended to the six imaging modalities in a tertiary care academic setting. Hospital billing and cost records were analyzed for fiscal year 1996. Costs were divided into labor and nonlabor categories and were allocated to individual imaging modalities on the basis of resources consumed. Physician cost and hospital overhead were not included. Unit costs were analyzed per technical relative value unit (RVU) and per examination.

RESULTS: The costs per technical RVU for diagnostic radiography, US, CT, MR imaging, scintigraphy, and interventional radiology were $65.06, $28.74, $20.95, $17.69, $42.19, and $89.03, respectively. The technical costs per examination for diagnostic radiography, US, CT, MR imaging, scintigraphy, and interventional radiology were $41.92, $50.28, $112.32, $266.96, $196.88, and $692.60, respectively.

CONCLUSION: The method of unit cost analysis for individual imaging modalities was successfully tested in a tertiary care setting. The method should be adopted to allow cost comparison across many institutions, which will permit the promotion of best practices.

Index terms: Cost-effectiveness • Computed tomography (CT), utilization, **.12112 • Economics, medical • Interventional procedures, utilization, **.126 • Magnetic resonance (MR), utilization, **.1214 • Radiography, **.11 • Radionuclide imaging, **.1216 • Ultrasound (US), utilization, **.1298




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 RadioGraphicsHome page
A. Singh, R. Danrad, P. F. Hahn, M. A. Blake, P. R. Mueller, and R. A. Novelline
MR Imaging of the Acute Abdomen and Pelvis: Acute Appendicitis and Beyond
RadioGraphics, September 1, 2007; 27(5): 1419 - 1431.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
W. Hollingworth
Radiology Cost and Outcomes Studies: Standard Practice and Emerging Methods
Am. J. Roentgenol., October 1, 2005; 185(4): 833 - 839.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
D. T. Gray, W. Hollingworth, C. C. Blackmore, M. A. Alotis, B. I. Martin, S. D. Sullivan, R. A. Deyo, and J. G. Jarvik
Conventional Radiography, Rapid MR Imaging, and Conventional MR Imaging for Low Back Pain: Activity-based Costs and Reimbursement
Radiology, June 1, 2003; 227(3): 669 - 680.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
W. W. Mayo-Smith, J. T. Rhea, W. J. Smith, C. M. Cobb, I. F. Gareen, and G. S. Dorfman
Transportable versus Fixed Platform CT Scanners: Comparison of Costs
Radiology, January 1, 2003; 226(1): 63 - 68.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
M. E. Liebeskind, P. H. Arger, A. Liebeskind, K. Maston, and C. Langlotz
Using Sonography to Examine Adult Patients at an Academic Medical Center: Have Usage Patterns Changed with the Expansion of Managed Care?
Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2002; 179(6): 1395 - 1399.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
M. D. Cohen
Determining Costs of Imaging Services
Radiology, September 1, 2001; 220(3): 563 - 565.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
H. P. Forman
Cost, Value, and Price: What Is the Difference and Why Care?
Radiology, January 1, 2001; 218(1): 25 - 26.
[Full Text]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
W. W. Mayo-Smith
Administration of a CT Division
Radiology, February 1, 2002; 222(2): 319 - 326.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]