June 2010

The current pace at which U.S. cardiology physician practices are merging with hospitals and integrated delivery networks (IDNs) has only quickened since the massive CMS cuts, which took effect at the beginning of 2010. According to a recent American College of Cardiology (ACC) survey, 54 percent of practices reported integration is being actively pursued or on the horizon. Executives and cardiologists from Minneapolis Heart Institute (MHI) and Piedmont Heart Institute (PHI)two geographically different practices, with varied models of integration, governance, physician compensation and vendor contractscame together to discuss these issues, along with an attorney, who has brokered many integrations on behalf of physicians.

The financial outlook of private cardiology practices has dramatically changed in the last few years. While many groups have entered or are considering some type of hospital integration model, many would like to remain in private practice. Smaller groups are particularly vulnerable to market forces, and yet, they are finding new ways to creatively bring in more patients and revenue.

Since the clinical benefits of fractional flow reserve (FFR) were confirmed with the release of the FAME study in January 2009, the technology has gained wider adoption. To assess its impact on contemporary cath labs, five interventionalists came together from across the U.S. to discuss the economic considerations.

The challenge with any imaging technology is to improve and lead to better patient care. Regarding echocardiography, the challenge is not only to become more accurate, but also to become more reproducible.

With the positive initial results of the CREST trial released in February, more facilities will begin exploring the idea of implementing a carotid artery stenting (CAS) program and weigh the challengesincluding turf battlesand  benefits, such as multidisciplinary cooperation.

Office-based nuclear cardiology practices are currently re-prioritizing, primarily due to reimbursement cuts called for in the 2010 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule. To keep their practices afloat, nuclear cardiologists are paying attention to several factors, including appropriate patient selection, improved lab management and cautious investment in technology.

The financial pressures associated with declining reimbursements and rising operational costs on private cardiology practices has resulted in increased migration of practices to hospital affiliation.

It was welcome news in May when CMS announced it had corrected some miscalculations to the 2010 Physician Fee Schedule, which resulted in a 16 percent payment increase for SPECT imaging.

Given the current SPECT isotope shortage, what role does PET play in cardiology from a business and clinical standpoint? Compared with SPECT imaging, PET is a relatively expensive technology. Therefore, could an investment in PET be the right choice for some?

Select an Issue
""