ArticleHealth services research2021
Medicare fee reductions and the overuse of intensity-modulated radiotherapy.
Article in Health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Urologist practice divestment from radiation vault ownership and treatment patterns for prostate cancer.Cancer · 2024Article
- Trends in Urethral Suspension With Robotic Prostatectomy Procedures Following Medicare Payment Policy Changes.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Medicare fee reductions and the overuse of intensity-modulated radiotherapy.Health services research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo estimate the impact of a large Medicare fee reduction for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) on its use in prostate and breast cancer patients. DATA SOURCES/STUDY
settingSEER-Medicare. STUDY
designWe compared trends in the use of IMRT between patients treated in practices directly affected by fee reductions (for prostate cancer, men treated in urology practices that own IMRT equipment; for breast cancer, women treated in freestanding radiotherapy clinics) and patients treated in other types of practices. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION
methodsWe identified breast and prostate cancer patients receiving IMRT using outpatient and physician office claims. We classified urology practices based on whether they billed for IMRT and radiotherapy clinics based on whether they were reimbursed under the Physician Fee Schedule. PRINCIPAL
findingsBetween 2006 and 2015 the payment for IMRT delivered in freestanding clinics and physician offices declined by $367 (-54.7%). However, the use of IMRT increased in physician practices subject to payment cuts, both in absolute terms and relative to use in practices unaffected by the payment cut. Use of IMRT in prostate cancer patients treated at urology practices that own IMRT equipment increased by 9.1 (95% CI: 2.0-16.2) percentage points between 2005 and 2016 relative to use in patients treated at other urology practices. Use of IMRT in breast cancer patients treated at freestanding radiotherapy centers increased by 7.5 (95% CI: -5.1 to 20.1) percentage points relative to use in patients treated at hospital-based centers.
conclusionsA steep decline in IMRT fees did not decrease IMRT use over the period from 2006 to 2015, though use has declined since 2010.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.