0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Research Letter | Health Care Reform

Headaches and Neuroimaging:  High Utilization and Costs Despite Guidelines FREE

Brian C. Callaghan, MD, MS1; Kevin A. Kerber, MD, MS1; Robert J. Pace, MD1; Lesli E. Skolarus, MD, MS1; James F. Burke, MD, MS1,2
[+] Author Affiliations
1Department of Neurology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor
2Department of Veterans Affairs Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, Michigan
JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174(5):819-821. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.173.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

While most headaches are attributable to benign conditions, patients and physicians are often concerned about intracranial pathologic conditions. However, the yield of significant abnormalities on neuroimaging in patients with chronic headaches is 1% to 3%.13 Given the comparable yield in patients without headaches, multiple guidelines have recommended against routine headache neuroimaging,46 and efforts to improve the efficiency of health care utilization, such as the Choosing Wisely campaign (ABIM [American Board of Internal Medicine] Foundation; http://www.choosingwisely.org), have identified these tests as a target. However, little is known about recent headache neuroimaging utilization, associated expenditures, and temporal trends in the United States.

Institutional review board exemption was obtained from the University of Michigan Health System. We utilized the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS), a nationally representative survey that uses a 3-stage sampling design (geographic regions, physician practices stratified within specialties, and patient visits within practices) to characterize all outpatient office-based care in the United States. We analyzed all headache visits for patients 18 years or older identified using the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Single-level Clinical Classification System (CCS) (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM] codes 339.xx, 784.0x, 346.xx, and 307.81). For migraine, ICD-9-CM codes 346.xx were used.

To characterize recent headache neuroimaging utilization, the proportion of headache visits with computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) ordered from 2007 through 2010 was estimated using descriptive statistics for multiple visit categories: all headache visits, all migraine visits, and visits with a primary diagnosis of headache or migraine. Neuroimaging use (CT or MRI) was directly entered onto the NAMCS survey instrument by physicians or their staff. Neuroimaging payments were determined using the Medicare physician fee schedule. To evaluate for trends over time, we identified headache neuroimaging utilization in years where these tests were directly abstracted onto the NAMCS survey instrument (1995-2000 and 2005-2010) in all headache visits. Survey weights were applied for all analyses.

Of all visits, 88% were by patients younger than 65 years and 78% were by female patients. Most visits were to primary care physicians (54.8%), followed by neurologists (20%), other specialists (12.9%), and nonprimary care generalists (12.4%). Over 4 years, a total of 51.1 million headache visits were identified, including 25.4 million migraine visits. Neuroimaging was obtained in 12.4% (95% CI, 10.5-14.7) of all headache visits and 9.8% (95% CI, 7.4-12.9) of migraine visits (Table). Headache neuroimaging utilization was higher if the headache or migraine diagnosis was listed as the primary diagnosis for the visit. Total neuroimaging expenditures were estimated at $3.9 billion over 4 years, including $1.5 billion from migraine visits. Between 1995 and 2010, neuroimaging utilization increased from 5.1% (95% CI, 2.7%-7.5%) to 14.7% (95% CI, 9.4%-20.0%) of all annual headache visits (Figure) (P < .001 for trend).

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable.  Neuroimaging Utilization and Associated Costs From 2007 Through 2010 Using Different Definitions of a Headache Visit
Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure.
Trends in Neuroimaging Utilization for the Entire Headache Population From 1995 Through 2000 and 2005 Through 2010

CT indicates computed tomography; and MRI, magnetic resonance imaging. Error bars indicate 95% confidence interval.

Graphic Jump Location

In the United States, neuroimaging is frequently ordered during outpatient headache visits (12%), contributes substantial cost (nearly $1 billion in annual costs), and is increasing over time. Since 2000, multiple guidelines have recommended against routine neuroimaging in patients with headaches because a serious intracranial pathologic condition is an uncommon cause.46 Consequently, the magnitude of per-visit neuroimaging use found in this study suggests considerable overuse. Perhaps guidelines have not curbed utilization because patients, as opposed to health care providers, may be the primary drivers of utilization. If so, efforts such as the Choosing Wisely campaign, which seeks to empower patients with knowledge regarding unwarranted testing, may be more effective than guidelines alone. Requiring preauthorization of these costly tests and/or value-based insurance designs that shift the cost burden for costly, low-yield tests to patients are alternative strategies. Given that headache neuroimaging is common, costly, and likely substantially overused, interventions to curb utilization of these tests have the potential to substantially reduce health care expenditures while improving guideline concordance. Therefore, optimizing headache neuroimaging practices should be a major national priority.

Corresponding Author: Brian C. Callaghan, MD, MS, Department of Neurology, University of Michigan Health System, 109 Zina Pitcher Pl, 4021 BSRB, Ann Arbor, MI 48104 (bcallagh@med.umich.edu).

Published Online: March 17, 2014. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.173.

Author Contributions: Dr Burke had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Study concept and design: Callaghan, Kerber, Pace, Burke.

Acquisition of data: Pace, Burke.

Analysis and interpretation of data: Callaghan, Kerber, Pace, Skolarus, Burke.

Drafting of the manuscript: Callaghan, Pace, Burke.

Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Callaghan, Kerber, Pace, Skolarus.

Statistical analysis: Callaghan, Burke.

Administrative, technical, and material support: Burke.

Study supervision: Pace.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

Funding/Support: Dr Callaghan is supported by the Katherine Rayner Program, the Taubman Medical Institute, and grant K23NS079417 from the National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Strokes. Dr Kerber is supported by grant R18 HS017690 from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Dr Skolarus is supported by grant K23NS073685 from the National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. Dr Burke is supported by grant K08NS082597 from the National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Strokes.

Role of the Sponsor: The sponsors had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, or interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Additional Contributions: Wade Cooper, MD, University of Michigan, contributed in critical reviewing the manuscript. He received no compensation for his contribution.

Clarke  CE, Edwards  J, Nicholl  DJ, Sivaguru  A.  Imaging results in a consecutive series of 530 new patients in the Birmingham Headache Service. J Neurol. 2010;257(8):1274-1278.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Sempere  AP, Porta-Etessam  J, Medrano  V,  et al.  Neuroimaging in the evaluation of patients with non-acute headache. Cephalalgia. 2005;25(1):30-35.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Wang  HZ, Simonson  TM, Greco  WR, Yuh  WT.  Brain MR imaging in the evaluation of chronic headache in patients without other neurologic symptoms. Acad Radiol. 2001;8(5):405-408.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Sandrini  G, Friberg  L, Coppola  G,  et al; European Federation of Neurological Sciences.  Neurophysiological tests and neuroimaging procedures in non-acute headache (2nd edition). Eur J Neurol. 2011;18(3):373-381.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Silberstein  SD.  Practice parameter: evidence-based guidelines for migraine headache (an evidence-based review): report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology. 2000;55(6):754-762.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Strain  JD, Strife  JL, Kushner  DC,  et al.  Headache: American College of Radiology: ACR appropriateness criteria. Radiology. 2000;215(suppl):855-860.
PubMed

Figures

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure.
Trends in Neuroimaging Utilization for the Entire Headache Population From 1995 Through 2000 and 2005 Through 2010

CT indicates computed tomography; and MRI, magnetic resonance imaging. Error bars indicate 95% confidence interval.

Graphic Jump Location

Tables

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable.  Neuroimaging Utilization and Associated Costs From 2007 Through 2010 Using Different Definitions of a Headache Visit

References

Clarke  CE, Edwards  J, Nicholl  DJ, Sivaguru  A.  Imaging results in a consecutive series of 530 new patients in the Birmingham Headache Service. J Neurol. 2010;257(8):1274-1278.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Sempere  AP, Porta-Etessam  J, Medrano  V,  et al.  Neuroimaging in the evaluation of patients with non-acute headache. Cephalalgia. 2005;25(1):30-35.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Wang  HZ, Simonson  TM, Greco  WR, Yuh  WT.  Brain MR imaging in the evaluation of chronic headache in patients without other neurologic symptoms. Acad Radiol. 2001;8(5):405-408.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Sandrini  G, Friberg  L, Coppola  G,  et al; European Federation of Neurological Sciences.  Neurophysiological tests and neuroimaging procedures in non-acute headache (2nd edition). Eur J Neurol. 2011;18(3):373-381.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Silberstein  SD.  Practice parameter: evidence-based guidelines for migraine headache (an evidence-based review): report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology. 2000;55(6):754-762.
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Strain  JD, Strife  JL, Kushner  DC,  et al.  Headache: American College of Radiology: ACR appropriateness criteria. Radiology. 2000;215(suppl):855-860.
PubMed

Correspondence

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Submit a Comment

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

2,092 Views
0 Citations

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

See Also...
Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles
Jobs
JAMAevidence.com

The Rational Clinical Examination: Evidence-Based Clinical Diagnosis
Make the Diagnosis: Does This Patient With Headaches Have a Migraine or Need Neuroimaging?

The Rational Clinical Examination: Evidence-Based Clinical Diagnosis
Original Article: Does This Patient With Headache Have a Migraine or Need Neuroimaging?

×