Dataset Information

Prior Authorization for Elective Diagnostic Catheterization: The Value of Reviewers in Cases with Clinical Ambiguity.

ABSTRACT: Background:In many situations, evidence-based guidelines cannot provide definitive guidance on the appropriateness of diagnostic catheterization. One specialty benefit management company has taken a 2-step approach to address this ambiguity by evaluating the appropriateness of diagnostic catheterization orders using a rule-based decision support system, and then having reviewers provide input through the consult system of a nondenial prior authorization program that involves peer discussion. Objective:To describe the outcomes of a 2-step approach to evaluating the appropriateness of elective diagnostic catheterization orders. Method:This program evaluation used data from elective diagnostic catheterization orders from 2015 that pertained to 1 health insurer's Medicare Advantage plans. The classifications of orders by the rule-based system and the approval rates after review by the consult system are presented for these plans. Chi-square tests were conducted to examine whether classifications of the orders by the rule-based and consult systems were independent of plan type, specialty of the ordering physician, or state of residence of the patient. Results:A total of 3808 orders for elective diagnostic catheterization in 2015 met the inclusion criteria. Inadequate initial justification was provided for 699 (18.4%) of the orders; after inquiry through the consult system, 509 (72.8%) of the remaining orders were approved. Among the 344 (9%) orders that were deemed potentially nonindicated according to the rule-based system, the consult system approved 298 (86.6%). Of the 2765 (72.6%) orders that were deemed potentially appropriate by the rule-based system, the consult system approved 2740 (99.1%). Chi-square tests did not show a significant association between plan type or physician specialty and the classification produced by the rule-based system or the consult system. The patients' state of residence was significantly associated with the classification of orders for the rule-based system (P <.001), but not for the consult system. Conclusion:Rule-based decision support can be combined with consult-based peer discussion to determine whether care is appropriate when guidelines are ambiguous. Poorly justified orders are often supportable after gathering information on the patient's presentation.

SUBMITTER: Powell AC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6207309 | biostudies-other | 2018 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Prior Authorization for Elective Diagnostic Catheterization: The Value of Reviewers in Cases with Clinical Ambiguity.

Powell Adam C AC Price Stephen E SE Nguyen Khoa K Smith Gary L GL Long James W JW Deshmukh Uday U UU

American health & drug benefits 20180601 4

<h4>Background</h4>In many situations, evidence-based guidelines cannot provide definitive guidance on the appropriateness of diagnostic catheterization. One specialty benefit management company has taken a 2-step approach to address this ambiguity by evaluating the appropriateness of diagnostic catheterization orders using a rule-based decision support system, and then having reviewers provide input through the consult system of a nondenial prior authorization program that involves peer discuss ...[more]

PMID: 30464785

Similar Datasets

Project description:Children with heart disease may require repeated X-Ray cardiac catheterization procedures, are more radiosensitive, and more likely to survive to experience oncologic risks of medical radiation. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is radiation-free and offers information about structure, function, and perfusion but not hemodynamics. We intend to perform complete radiation-free diagnostic right heart catheterization entirely using CMR fluoroscopy guidance in an unselected cohort of pediatric patients; we report the feasibility and safety.We performed 50 CMR fluoroscopy guided comprehensive transfemoral right heart catheterizations in 39 pediatric (12.7 ± 4.7 years) subjects referred for clinically indicated cardiac catheterization. CMR guided catheterizations were assessed by completion (success/failure), procedure time, and safety events (catheterization, anesthesia). Pre and post CMR body temperature was recorded. Concurrent invasive hemodynamic and diagnostic CMR data were collected.During a twenty-two month period (3/2015 - 12/2016), enrolled subjects had the following clinical indications: post-heart transplant 33%, shunt 28%, pulmonary hypertension 18%, cardiomyopathy 15%, valvular heart disease 3%, and other 3%. Radiation-free CMR guided right heart catheterization attempts were all successful using passive catheters. In two subjects with septal defects, right and left heart catheterization were performed. There were no complications. One subject had six such procedures. Most subjects (51%) had undergone multiple (5.5 ± 5) previous X-Ray cardiac catheterizations. Retained thoracic surgical or transcatheter implants (36%) did not preclude successful CMR fluoroscopy heart catheterization. During the procedure, two subjects were receiving vasopressor infusions at baseline because of poor cardiac function, and in ten procedures, multiple hemodynamic conditions were tested.Comprehensive CMR fluoroscopy guided right heart catheterization was feasible and safe in this small cohort of pediatric subjects. This includes subjects with previous metallic implants, those requiring continuous vasopressor medication infusions, and those requiring pharmacologic provocation. Children requiring multiple, serial X-Ray cardiac catheterizations may benefit most from radiation sparing. This is a step toward wholly CMR guided diagnostic (right and left heart) cardiac catheterization and future CMR guided cardiac intervention.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02739087 registered February 17, 2016.

Dataset Information

Prior Authorization for Elective Diagnostic Catheterization: The Value of Reviewers in Cases with Clinical Ambiguity.

Publications

Prior Authorization for Elective Diagnostic Catheterization: The Value of Reviewers in Cases with Clinical Ambiguity.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets