At the Intersection of Health, Health Care and Policy Cite this article as: Jonathan A. Flug Price Transparency In Medical Imaging Health Affairs, 33, no.11 (2014):2081 doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2014.1098
The online version of this article, along with updated information and services, is available at: http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/33/11/2081.3.full.html
For Reprints, Links & Permissions: http://healthaffairs.org/1340_reprints.php E-mail Alerts : http://content.healthaffairs.org/subscriptions/etoc.dtl To Subscribe: http://content.healthaffairs.org/subscriptions/online.shtml
Health Affairs is published monthly by Project HOPE at 7500 Old Georgetown Road, Suite 600, Bethesda, MD 20814-6133. Copyright © 2014 by Project HOPE - The People-to-People Health Foundation. As provided by United States copyright law (Title 17, U.S. Code), no part of Health Affairs may be reproduced, displayed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying or by information storage or retrieval systems, without prior written permission from the Publisher. All rights reserved.
Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution Downloaded from content.healthaffairs.org by Health Affairs on May 2, 2015 by guest
Letters There is a limit of 300 words for letters to the editor. Health Affairs reserves the right to edit all letters for clarity, length, and tone. Letters can be submitted by e-mail, [email protected], or the Health Affairs website, http:// www.healthaffairs.org.
doi:
10.1377/hlthaff.2014.1098
Price Transparency In Medical Imaging The article by Sze-jung Wu, Christiane Shah, and coauthors regarding price transparency for magnetic resonance imaging (Aug 2014) is a compelling study that addresses disparities in imaging costs and consumer-driven health care. In the study, the authors stratify imaging centers based on “quality,” which was based on “an imaging facility’s capabilities.” Defining quality in diagnostic imaging is an extremely complex topic, and that quality is very difficult to quantify. A more detailed description of how nonradiologists defined quality would have been helpful for practicing radiologists who are looking to improve the service they provide. The authors conclude that “a price transparency initiative…can successfully reduce health care costs.” This is certainly a desirable outcome for the health care system as a whole. However, decreased imaging costs may not be sustainable in the long term. A survey performed by the imaging journal Diagnostic Imaging found that 70 percent of imaging groups were concerned with facing a merger. 1
A variety of reasons exist for this paradigm shift toward consolidation of radiology groups, but decreasing reimbursement and bargaining power remains a central cause. Fewer groups that each have a larger market share can negotiate more effectively with payers, compared to groups with a smaller share, and will eventually drive imaging costs back up. The desire to decrease costs is a noble one. However, there can be unintended consequences that may not ultimately be beneficial for patients or the health care system as a whole. An emphasis on identifying high-quality, appropriate imaging should be the central goal. If medical imaging can continue to progress toward providing higher quality care, overall patient outcomes will improve and health care costs should decrease as a result. Jonathan A. Flug University of Colorado AURORA , COLORADO NOTE 1 Howell WLJ. Radiology consolidation: an update on the practice landscape. DiagnosticImaging [serial on the Internet]. 2013 Mar 21 [cited 2014 Aug 15]. (Registration required). Available from: http://www.diagnosticimaging.com/practicemanagement/radiology-consolidation-updatepractice-landscape
N ov e m b e r 2 0 1 4
33 : 1 1
Downloaded from content.healthaffairs.org by Health Affairs on May 2, 2015 by guest
Health A ffairs
2081
The online version of this article, along with updated information and services, is available at: http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/33/11/2081.3.full.html
For Reprints, Links & Permissions: http://healthaffairs.org/1340_reprints.php E-mail Alerts : http://content.healthaffairs.org/subscriptions/etoc.dtl To Subscribe: http://content.healthaffairs.org/subscriptions/online.shtml
Health Affairs is published monthly by Project HOPE at 7500 Old Georgetown Road, Suite 600, Bethesda, MD 20814-6133. Copyright © 2014 by Project HOPE - The People-to-People Health Foundation. As provided by United States copyright law (Title 17, U.S. Code), no part of Health Affairs may be reproduced, displayed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying or by information storage or retrieval systems, without prior written permission from the Publisher. All rights reserved.
Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution Downloaded from content.healthaffairs.org by Health Affairs on May 2, 2015 by guest
Letters There is a limit of 300 words for letters to the editor. Health Affairs reserves the right to edit all letters for clarity, length, and tone. Letters can be submitted by e-mail, [email protected], or the Health Affairs website, http:// www.healthaffairs.org.
doi:
10.1377/hlthaff.2014.1098
Price Transparency In Medical Imaging The article by Sze-jung Wu, Christiane Shah, and coauthors regarding price transparency for magnetic resonance imaging (Aug 2014) is a compelling study that addresses disparities in imaging costs and consumer-driven health care. In the study, the authors stratify imaging centers based on “quality,” which was based on “an imaging facility’s capabilities.” Defining quality in diagnostic imaging is an extremely complex topic, and that quality is very difficult to quantify. A more detailed description of how nonradiologists defined quality would have been helpful for practicing radiologists who are looking to improve the service they provide. The authors conclude that “a price transparency initiative…can successfully reduce health care costs.” This is certainly a desirable outcome for the health care system as a whole. However, decreased imaging costs may not be sustainable in the long term. A survey performed by the imaging journal Diagnostic Imaging found that 70 percent of imaging groups were concerned with facing a merger. 1
A variety of reasons exist for this paradigm shift toward consolidation of radiology groups, but decreasing reimbursement and bargaining power remains a central cause. Fewer groups that each have a larger market share can negotiate more effectively with payers, compared to groups with a smaller share, and will eventually drive imaging costs back up. The desire to decrease costs is a noble one. However, there can be unintended consequences that may not ultimately be beneficial for patients or the health care system as a whole. An emphasis on identifying high-quality, appropriate imaging should be the central goal. If medical imaging can continue to progress toward providing higher quality care, overall patient outcomes will improve and health care costs should decrease as a result. Jonathan A. Flug University of Colorado AURORA , COLORADO NOTE 1 Howell WLJ. Radiology consolidation: an update on the practice landscape. DiagnosticImaging [serial on the Internet]. 2013 Mar 21 [cited 2014 Aug 15]. (Registration required). Available from: http://www.diagnosticimaging.com/practicemanagement/radiology-consolidation-updatepractice-landscape
N ov e m b e r 2 0 1 4
33 : 1 1
Downloaded from content.healthaffairs.org by Health Affairs on May 2, 2015 by guest
Health A ffairs
2081
