Impact of a Collaborative Radiology Utilization Management Program: Does the Specialty of the Referring Provider...

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of a collaborative radiology utilization management program on the disposition of cases according to provider specialty.

A utilization management program directed by a radiology benefit management company provided peer-to-peer decision support for providers ordering advanced outpatient imaging studies. After a radiologist reviewed the cases, based upon provider specialty, the rates of the following dispositions were analyzed: study approved by consensus, study changed by consensus, study not performed by consensus, study approved (no consensus), and study administratively not performed (no callback). Aggregated rates of study changed or not performed by consensus (withdrawals) were used to assess the effect of provider-radiologist collaboration. The rate of no callback was used to assess sentinel effect. The combined rate of withdrawals and no callback represented the overall impact of radiologist participation. The project period was 5 years.

A total of 168,915 studies were reviewed: 58.6% were approved, 6.8% were changed, and 13.5% were withdrawn by consensus; 6.0% were approved without consensus; 15.2% were withdrawn because of no callback; 35.5% initially ordered were not performed at the time they were ordered. Family practice (25.3%) and internal medicine (23.8%) had the highest aggregated rates of study changed or withdrawn by consensus. Thoracic surgery (13.3%), neurosurgery (11.2%), and orthopedic surgery (9.3%) had the lowest rates. Internal medicine (18.0%), neurology (17.7%), and family practice (17.4%) had the highest rates of study withdrawn owing to no callback. Pediatrics (7.1%) and ophthalmology (7.3%) had the lowest rates. The overall impact was greatest for family practice (42.7%), internal medicine (41.8%), and neurology (33.4%) and least for orthopedic surgery (22.8%) and neurosurgery (24.0%).

Radiologist participation had substantial impact regardless of provider specialty. The impact was greatest on primary care providers who are heavier users of radiology.