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


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
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 Matin, A.
Right arrow Articles by Khorasani, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Matin, A.
Right arrow Articles by Khorasani, R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?

Inpatient Radiology Utilization: Trends over the Past Decade

Amin Matin1, David W. Bates1,2, Andrew Sussman2, Pablo Ros3, Richard Hanson1 and Ramin Khorasani1,3

1 Center for Evidence-Based Imaging, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis St., Boston, MA 02115.
2 Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115.
3 Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115.



View larger version (40K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 1 —Bar graph shows number of inpatient imaging studies (gray bars), number of admissions (black bars), and number of admissions adjusted for severity of disease using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' case-mix index (hatched bars). Note significant increase in all categories over 10-year study period, with increases in imaging studies and admissions occurring in latter half of study period.

 


View larger version (13K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 2 —Graph shows average length of stay ({blacksquare}) and number of total imaging studies ({blacktriangleup}) and conventional studies ({diamondsuit}) per case-mix-adjusted admission, per year. Note decrease in all categories over time, although decrease in length of stay occurred predominantly during first half of study period and was not statistically significant over the 10-year study period.

 


View larger version (9K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 3 —Graph shows number of studies per admission per year for sonography ({blacktriangleup}) and nuclear medicine studies ({blacksquare}), adjusted for severity of disease. Note significant decrease in sonography. Use of nuclear studies increased after 1997 before leveling off in recent years.

 


View larger version (9K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 4 —Graph shows number of CT ({diamondsuit}) and MRI ({blacksquare}) studies per case-mix-adjusted admission, per year. Note significant increase in utilization of both techniques, with change being seen predominantly in latter half of 10-year period.

 


View larger version (10K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 5 —Graph shows global ({blacktriangleup}), technical ({blacksquare}), and professional ({diamondsuit}) radiology relative value units (RVUs) per admission, adjusted for severity of disease, per year. Note that all three RVU components increased significantly, although the majority of the increase in global RVUs is accounted for by increase in technical RVUs, which occurred in latter half of study period.

 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?



HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2006 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.