Khurana, Aditya

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has had major impacts on all healthcare services, including cardiac imaging. In this study, we investigate annual changes in cardiac imaging procedural volume and reimbursement among Medicare Beneficiaries (MB) from 2018 to 2020. Methods: We used the Center of Medicare and Medicaid Services database to identify a 100% sample of MB who underwent cardiac imaging procedures from 2018 to 2020. Using the Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes, we identified transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE), transesophageal echocardiogram (TEE), stress echocardiogram, and nuclear stress test procedures. We examined each procedure’s total, inpatient (facility), and outpatient (non-facility) annual volumes per 1,000 MB. We also examined the total annual Medicare reimbursement per imaging type during that period. We compared annual changes in volumes and total reimbursement between two-time intervals: 2018-2019 and 2019-2020. Results: All annual cardiac imaging procedural volumes decreased significantly in 2020 compared to 2019 ( P<0.001 ). The biggest change was observed in TEE, which decreased by 29.20%, followed by stress echocardiography (26.01%), nuclear stress test (22.96%), and TTE (10.68%). The decrease was more evident in the inpatient setting. Inpatient stress echocardiography decreased by 27.04% (vs 23.82% in the outpatient setting), nuclear stress test decreased by 24.82% (vs 20.66%), and TTE decreased by 11.03% (vs 9.58%). There was also a significant reduction in total annual reimbursement for all procedures in 2020 compared to 2019 ( P=0.0015 ). Stress echocardiogram, nuclear stress test, TEE, and TTE reimbursement decreased by 28.08%, 24.00%, 21.11%, and 15.79%, respectively. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a significant and abrupt reduction in annual cardiac imaging procedural volumes and total reimbursement among MB in both inpatient and outpatient settings.

Abstract Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) pulmonary vein isolation ablation has been utilized increasingly yet variably in the USA. Purpose To identify variations in AF ablation utilization and reimbursement among Medicare beneficiaries (MB). Methodology We used a 100% sample of MB who underwent AF ablation from 2013 to 2019. We stratified data geographically (Northeast, South, West, and Midwest), identified the mean AF prevalence and the number of AF ablations per 100,000 MB, and examined the correlation between AF prevalence and ablation. We also examined the number of cardiologists performing AF ablation per 100,000 MB and the average number of AF ablation per individual cardiologist (ablation/cardiologist), as well as average submitted charge (ASC) for AF ablation. Additionally, we stratified data per urban versus rural areas as well as the gender of performing cardiologists and examined ablation/cardiologist and the ASC. Results Geographic analysis: The mean AF prevalence, the rates AF ablation per 100,000 MB, the number of cardiologists per 100,000 MB, and ablation/cardiologist have shown a steady increase in all regions across years. In all years, the mean AF prevalence was significantly different among regions with the highest prevalence in the Northeast and the lowest in the West (all P&lt;0.001), however, there was no significant difference in the rates of AF ablation per 100,000 MB (all P≥0.056). There was significant correlation between AF prevalence and ablation only in the Midwest and the West, with 46.4% and 43.4% positive correlation respectively (P≤0.0001). The number of cardiologists performing AF ablation per 100,000 MB was not significantly different among regions in all years (All P≥0.48), however, ablation/cardiologist was significantly higher in the West and the South compared to the Northeast and the Midwest (All P&lt;0.0001). On the contrary, the ASC has shown steady decrease in all regions. The ASC was significantly different among regions in all year (all P≤0.003) with higher ASC in the Midwest and the Northeast compared to the south and the West. Urban vs rural analysis: Ablation/cardiologist was not significantly different between urban and rural areas in all years (all P≥0.068) except in 2013 when it was significantly higher in urban areas (P=0.004). The ASC was significantly higher in rural areas only in 2015 and 2019 (P=0.037 and P=0.029 respectively) however, there was no significant difference in the rest of the years (P≥0.07). Gender analysis: Ablation/cardiologist was not significantly different between male and female cardiologists in all years (P≥0.056) except in 2017 when the average was significantly higher per male cardiologists (P=0.007). The ASC was not significantly different in all years (P≥0.362). Conclusion There are variations in AF ablation utilization and reimbursement among MB in the USA according to geographic, urban and rural regions, and the gender of performing cardiologists. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.