PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 8010200

Coding and reimbursement issues for dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry.

Abstract

Bone densitometry has a unique and invaluable place in the prevention, diagnosis, and management of osteoporosis. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) is currently considered the bone densitometric technique of choice. With this method, the patient at risk for osteoporosis can be identified so that appropriate clinical interventions to prevent fracture can be undertaken. DEXA also allows assessment of the efficacy of these interventions in preventing bone loss. As with any other technology, however, bone densitometry must be properly used in the clinical setting to achieve this benefit. Critical to the proper use of the technology is the realization that a complete assessment of fracture risk requires the measurement of both the spine and the proximal part of the femur, not either site alone, and that assessment of therapeutic efficacy might also require the measurement of both sites, not either site alone. Effective January 1, 1994, the Clinical Procedural Terminology (CPT) code for DEXA has been 76075. This code is intended for measurement of a single site and is to be reimbursed at a global rate of $60.85. Although the assignment of a CPT code for this clinically valuable technology is most welcome, the lack of a code reflecting at least two sites of study and the low rate of reimbursement for a single site suggest a misunderstanding of the actual costs of the technology and the need, on occasion, for measurements at multiple sites.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

D J Sartoris. 1994. Coding and reimbursement issues for dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry.. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.163.1.8010200

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

A repeated measures concordance correlation coefficient.

The concordance correlation coefficient is commonly used to assess agreement between two raters or two methods of measuring a response when the data are measured on a continuous scale. However, the situation may arise in which repeated measurements are taken for each rater or method, e.g. longitudinal studies in clinical trials or bioassay data with subsamples. This paper proposes a coefficient for measuring agreement between two raters or two methods of measuring a response in the presence of repeated measurements. We illustrate the methodology with examples comparing (1) 1-hr versus 2-hr blood draws for measuring cortisol in an asthma clinical trial and (2) two measurements of percentage body fat, from skinfold calipers and dual energy X-ray absorptiometry.

Absorptiometry, Photon↗

Crystallization and preliminary X-ray analysis of a domain in the Runx2 transcription factor that interacts with the 1alpha,25 dihydroxy vitamin D3 receptor.

The Runx2 transcription factor is a key regulator of osteoblast differentiation. In response to 1alpha,25 dihydroxy vitamin D3, Runx2 may interact with the 1alpha,25 dihydroxy vitamin D3 receptor (VDR) in the promoter of target genes, producing a synergic activation of their transcription. Previous studies have suggested that the motifs responsible for the VDR-Runx2 interaction are contained within the 230-361 domain of Runx2. In this work, we confirmed by GST-pull down that Runx2(I(209-361)) is sufficient to interact with the VDR. To obtain structural information, GST-Runx2(I(209-361)) protein was overexpressed in Escherichia coli, purified and crystallized using the hanging-drop vapor-diffusion method and polyethyleneglycol as a precipitant. The crystals were found to diffract to a maximum resolution of 2.7 A and a complete data set to a 3.3 A resolution was collected and analyzed. The crystals belong to the tetragonal system, with a space group P4 and unit-cell parameters of a = b = 90.8, and c = 57.2 A. The presence of a monomer of the recombinant GST-Runx2(I(209-361)) in the asymmetric unit gives a V(M) of 2.7 A(3) Da(-1) and a solvent content of 54.8%.

Absorptiometry, Photon↗

Quantifying the treatment effect explained by markers in the presence of measurement error.

Surrogate markers or intermediate markers are important in identifying subjects with high risk of a serious disease or for monitoring disease progression of a subject on treatment. Quantifying the proportion of treatment effect (PTE) explained by markers has been studied extensively. Due to reasons such as biological variation, limited machine precision, etc. markers are generally measured with error. The estimated PTE ignoring the measurement error could be biased, which may lead to incorrect conclusions. In this article, we adjust for the measurement error using regression calibration to construct a less biased estimator of excess relative odds, a quantity to measure the treatment effect explained by markers. The method is applied to data from a clinical study in osteoporosis.

Absorptiometry, Photon↗