E-News Exclusive

Radiology Needs to Quantify Quality Service

By Jim Knaub

In many ways, quality in radiology is a matter of perception: hard to define, but you know it when you see it.

Radiology groups must convince hospitals that radiologists provide quality service so the organizations can secure and keep contracts and/or draw patients to their imaging centers. Hospitals tout quality to gain a competitive advantage in their market. But how do you prove quality in some measureable way?

That question is taking on new significance in medical imaging as health care reform in the form of accountable care organizations (ACOs) specified in the Affordable Care Act start to take shape. Exactly when and how quality, outcomes, and value will alter imaging’s current volume-driven economic success model remains to be seen.

The presence of ACOs in the Medicare Shared Savings Program—more than 250 ACOs covering up to 4 million Medicare beneficiaries—shows that the organizations are getting serious consideration. We don’t know what the data will show for programs started in 2012 and 2013, but waiting until such data are available before considering ACOs’ role in the future of health care could leave your organization scrambling to catch up.

A shift from volume as the chief determinant of success to some measure of quality and value would be a big change. Identifying how to implement and measure that change is a serious challenge for imaging management.

If you’re headed to the AHRA annual meeting later this month, you’ll have a good opportunity to catch up, as two sessions in the physician program will focus on the topic. Richard Duszak, MD, will present “Creating Standards and Repeatability — Defining Quality,” which will look at meaningful use criteria and the Physician Quality Reporting System, two efforts to move health care toward quantifiable quality measures. Timothy V. Myers, MD, will speak on structured reporting as a tool for quality and efficiency. Other related sessions from the AHRA program include the following:

• “Strategic Planning in the New Era of Accountable Care”

• “Key Metrics and Quality Indicators: Regular Review for Optimal Performance”

• “Patient Satisfaction vs. Quality Bedside Imaging”

Given the absence of a clear quality definition, imaging leaders may have to develop their own measures to prove the quality of the services their organizations provide, which may become a more important factor in their economic success in the years to come.

— Jim Knaub is editor of Radiology Today.