Cargando…

Cost Analysis and Reimbursement of Weightbearing Computed Tomography

BACKGROUND: Weightbearing computed tomography (WBCT) is becoming a valuable tool in the evaluation of foot and ankle pathology. Currently, cost analyses of WBCT scanners in private practice are lacking in the literature. This study evaluated the costs of acquisition, utilization, and reimbursements...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alexander, Nathaniel B., Sarfani, Shumaila, Strickland, Carson D., Richardson, David R., Murphy, G. Andrew, Grear, Benjamin J., Bettin, Clayton C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10052493/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37009418
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/24730114231164143
_version_ 1785015174383534080
author Alexander, Nathaniel B.
Sarfani, Shumaila
Strickland, Carson D.
Richardson, David R.
Murphy, G. Andrew
Grear, Benjamin J.
Bettin, Clayton C.
author_facet Alexander, Nathaniel B.
Sarfani, Shumaila
Strickland, Carson D.
Richardson, David R.
Murphy, G. Andrew
Grear, Benjamin J.
Bettin, Clayton C.
author_sort Alexander, Nathaniel B.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Weightbearing computed tomography (WBCT) is becoming a valuable tool in the evaluation of foot and ankle pathology. Currently, cost analyses of WBCT scanners in private practice are lacking in the literature. This study evaluated the costs of acquisition, utilization, and reimbursements for a WBCT at a tertiary referral center, information of particular interest to practices considering obtaining such equipment. METHODS: All WBCT scans performed at a tertiary referral center over the 55-month period (August 2016 to February 2021) were retrospectively evaluated. Patient demographics, pathology location, etiology, subspecialty of the ordering provider, and whether the study was unilateral or bilateral were collected. Reimbursement was calculated based on payor source as a percentage of Medicare reimbursement for lower extremity CT. The number of total scans performed per month was evaluated to determine revenue generated per month. RESULTS: Over the study period, 1903 scans were performed. An average of 34.6 scans were performed each month. Forty-one providers ordered WBCT scans over the study period. Foot and ankle fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeons ordered 75.5% of all scans. The most common location of pathology was the ankle, and the most common etiology was trauma. The device was cost neutral at 44.2 months, assuming reimbursement for each study was commensurate with Medicare rates. The device became cost neutral at approximately 29.9 months when calculating reimbursement according to mixed-payor source. CONCLUSION: As WBCT scan becomes more widely used for evaluation of foot and ankle pathology, practices may be interested in understanding the financial implications of such an investment. To the authors’ knowledge, this study is the only cost-effectiveness analysis of WBCT based in the United States. We found that in a large, multispecialty orthopaedic group, WBCT can be a financially viable asset and a valuable diagnostic tool for a variety of pathologies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10052493
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100524932023-03-30 Cost Analysis and Reimbursement of Weightbearing Computed Tomography Alexander, Nathaniel B. Sarfani, Shumaila Strickland, Carson D. Richardson, David R. Murphy, G. Andrew Grear, Benjamin J. Bettin, Clayton C. Foot Ankle Orthop Article BACKGROUND: Weightbearing computed tomography (WBCT) is becoming a valuable tool in the evaluation of foot and ankle pathology. Currently, cost analyses of WBCT scanners in private practice are lacking in the literature. This study evaluated the costs of acquisition, utilization, and reimbursements for a WBCT at a tertiary referral center, information of particular interest to practices considering obtaining such equipment. METHODS: All WBCT scans performed at a tertiary referral center over the 55-month period (August 2016 to February 2021) were retrospectively evaluated. Patient demographics, pathology location, etiology, subspecialty of the ordering provider, and whether the study was unilateral or bilateral were collected. Reimbursement was calculated based on payor source as a percentage of Medicare reimbursement for lower extremity CT. The number of total scans performed per month was evaluated to determine revenue generated per month. RESULTS: Over the study period, 1903 scans were performed. An average of 34.6 scans were performed each month. Forty-one providers ordered WBCT scans over the study period. Foot and ankle fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeons ordered 75.5% of all scans. The most common location of pathology was the ankle, and the most common etiology was trauma. The device was cost neutral at 44.2 months, assuming reimbursement for each study was commensurate with Medicare rates. The device became cost neutral at approximately 29.9 months when calculating reimbursement according to mixed-payor source. CONCLUSION: As WBCT scan becomes more widely used for evaluation of foot and ankle pathology, practices may be interested in understanding the financial implications of such an investment. To the authors’ knowledge, this study is the only cost-effectiveness analysis of WBCT based in the United States. We found that in a large, multispecialty orthopaedic group, WBCT can be a financially viable asset and a valuable diagnostic tool for a variety of pathologies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic. SAGE Publications 2023-03-27 /pmc/articles/PMC10052493/ /pubmed/37009418 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/24730114231164143 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Article
Alexander, Nathaniel B.
Sarfani, Shumaila
Strickland, Carson D.
Richardson, David R.
Murphy, G. Andrew
Grear, Benjamin J.
Bettin, Clayton C.
Cost Analysis and Reimbursement of Weightbearing Computed Tomography
title Cost Analysis and Reimbursement of Weightbearing Computed Tomography
title_full Cost Analysis and Reimbursement of Weightbearing Computed Tomography
title_fullStr Cost Analysis and Reimbursement of Weightbearing Computed Tomography
title_full_unstemmed Cost Analysis and Reimbursement of Weightbearing Computed Tomography
title_short Cost Analysis and Reimbursement of Weightbearing Computed Tomography
title_sort cost analysis and reimbursement of weightbearing computed tomography
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10052493/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37009418
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/24730114231164143
work_keys_str_mv AT alexandernathanielb costanalysisandreimbursementofweightbearingcomputedtomography
AT sarfanishumaila costanalysisandreimbursementofweightbearingcomputedtomography
AT stricklandcarsond costanalysisandreimbursementofweightbearingcomputedtomography
AT richardsondavidr costanalysisandreimbursementofweightbearingcomputedtomography
AT murphygandrew costanalysisandreimbursementofweightbearingcomputedtomography
AT grearbenjaminj costanalysisandreimbursementofweightbearingcomputedtomography
AT bettinclaytonc costanalysisandreimbursementofweightbearingcomputedtomography