Radiologists must become gatekeepers of medical imaging, says Penn Medicine's Saurabh Jha

Big changes are coming to the US health care system—some in response to the mounting scrutiny of medical imaging. New task force recommendations, the Choosing Wisely campaign, and Affordable Care Act policies are all attempting to curtail overtesting—with CT scans, MRIs and any other screening often ordered unnecessarily—that can drive up medical costs, lead to waste and unnecessary radiation, and prompt undue anxiety about false positive results.

These are all worthy efforts, but to really make an impact, a paradigm shift in clinical care will have to happen, Saurabh Jha, MB, BS, of the department of Radiology in the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, suggests this week in a New England Journal of Medicine "Perspective" article.

Radiologists must become the gatekeepers of medical imaging, as opposed to serving as just service providers for patients, he writes. In the face of tighter guidelines and ultimately less leeway for physicians to order potentially superfluous tests, he calls on radiologists to be the ones who step forward and manage imaging utilization. But first, they need the power to do so.

"The emphasis on service provision, operations, and efficiency has pushed radiologists to the periphery of clinical decision making," Dr. Jha writes. "To be effective gatekeepers, they will have to move to the center."

In the piece, titled "From Imaging Gatekeeper to Service Provider—A Transatlantic Journey," Dr. Jha opens with an anecdote, a trip down memory lane that introduces us to "Dr. No," a radiologist in Great Britain, where he did his surgery residency, known for turning down requests for scans. Dr. No needed a justified reason, as the country's system is faced with limited imaging resources. In other words, you had to have a pretty good reason to order that CT, because often the diagnosis could be found another way.

"[In Britain}, radiologists acted as gatekeepers," he writes. "To get through the gate, clinicians had to be at the top of their game. To triage effectively, radiologists had to think like the referring physicians. Both sides pushed each other, and the net clinical acumen improved."

Here in the US, Dr. Jha came upon a different approach to treating patients: Fear of displeasing referring physicians or even being perceived as "rationing" care, he noticed, had many radiologists acting more like "Dr. Yes" more often than not.

The health care system in the UK is set up differently from the US, but there are perhaps some lessons to be learned here, Dr. Jha suggests, if we want to get out of the "imaging boom." Mainly, it shows us that a radiologist, acting as the gatekeeper, can exercise restraint in imaging utilization, he says.

Remember, "gatekeepers don't simply advise on the best imaging method," he writes, "they question whether a given diagnosis should be suspected in the first place."

But such a shift will require two key changes to our health system. The incentive system needs to be changed, as are there no rewards for denying an imaging study—one loses a reimbursable exam and expends time in which other reimbursable studies can be read. But there is a bigger obstacle, he writes: the service-provision mindset. Radiologists don't wish to displease referring physicians, lest they take their business to someone who won't question their test-ordering ability.

So how do they move to the center and away from the fringe?

"They'll have to develop clinical-imaging conferences, act as imaging consultants, and conduct imaging rounds. Radiology leadership must provide incentives for these activities without compromising efficiency, by developing granular metrics for quality," he writes.

Benchmarks will also have to be established for the acceptable proportion of negative studies, and bundled payments for accountable care organizations could offer a sentinel opportunity to face these challenges.

Either way, change is coming and radiologists must decide whether to "greet the ebb of imaging passively or by stepping forward to captain and manage a rational decline," he concludes.

Comments

  1. Paul Dorio Paul Dorio United States says:

    I posted similarly: drpauldorio.com/.../radiology-collaboration-enhances-patient-care

    But the third main obstacle that you did not mention is that medical liability risks will continue to deter radiologists from getting too involved in "gatekeeping." The problem being, of course, is that the radiologist thinks that s/he knows less about the patient's clinical status than the physician making the imaging request. That thought is usually accurate. But the radiologist sells him/herself short who does not realize that s/he has a fund of knowledge about potential imaging findings. That fund of knowledge, of course, can assist our clinical colleagues and help to identify appropriate imaging studies. I believe we can do it. But it will take a sea change of the radiology masses before it becomes actual practice.

The opinions expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of News Medical.
Post a new comment
Post

While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses. Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for medical information you must always consult a medical professional before acting on any information provided.

Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their privacy principles.

Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential information.

Read the full Terms & Conditions.

You might also like...
Scientists unveil a 3D photoacoustic scanner that speeds up vascular imaging for real-time clinical use