HCA Probe Reignites Questions Over Interventional Appropriateness
A third development may have had some influence as well. Last July, a report in the Journal of the American Medical Association used the American College of Cardiology's PCI registry and found that only 50% of a sample of such procedures met necessity criteria, 12% were indisputably unnecessary, and another 38% were uncertain.
Fonarow says that over the last several years, perhaps in response to "some of the earlier cases that were under scrutiny," hospitals, cardiology practices and professional societies have become proactive to assure the necessity of all procedures.
Sometimes, he says, hospitals will have a second interventional cardiologist review the films before allowing an interventionalist to proceed. Or, cases will be subject to subsequent peer review.
Some hospitals have decided to regularly select a random set of cases to send to a committee "to see if there's any concern and provide feedback, to make sure they're providing high quality, but also appropriate, care."
"You're seeing lot of hospitals doing that," he says.
- CMS to Speak with ICD-10 Backers Tuesday
- Feds Stonewall ICD-10 Summit
- Boston Marathon Bombing Yields Lessons for Hospitals
- Governor Details Healthcare Payment Reform Path in Arkansas
- Hospital Groups Back NQF Report on Patient Sociodemographics
- Managed Care Contract Negotiations Morph Under PPACA
- Cyberattack Drill Exposes Healthcare's Vulnerabilities
- Physician Payment Data is Where the Action Is
- NY Abolishes Written Practice Agreement for NPs
- MetroHealth Revs Its Population Health Engine