Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 and its Adverse Impact on Medicare Beneficiary Access to Positron Emission Tomography

  • Opinion Paper
  • Published:
Molecular Imaging and Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Chart 1

References

  1. Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. Signed into law by President Bush on February 8, 2005

  2. Gambhir SS, et al. (2001) A tabulated summary of the FDG PET literature. J Nucl Med (Supp) 42(5):1S–93S

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Cerfolio MD, et al. (2004) The accuracy of integrated PET-CT compared with dedicated PET alone for staging of patients with NSCL. Ann Thoracic Surg 78(3):10017–1023

    Google Scholar 

  4. The Market for PET Radiopharmaceuticals and PET Imaging. BIO-TECH Systems, Inc. Report #220, July 2005

  5. CPT 2005. American Medical Association

  6. National Oncologic PET Registry (NOPR) website: http://www.cancerpetregistry.org

  7. Medicare News. CMS office of Public Affairs February 10, 2006

  8. NOPR Operations Manual. National Oncologic PET Registry (NOPR) website: http://www.cancerpetregistry.org

  9. The Market for PET Radiopharmaceuticals and PET Imaging. BIO-TECH Systems, Inc. Report #220, July 2005

  10. Compiled from 2005 Cancer Statistics provided by the American Cancer Society

  11. Cancer Prognosis. Wall Street Journal On-line (editorial): February 23, 2006, p A16

  12. Cancer Prognosis. Wall Street Journal On-line (editorial): February 23, 2006, p A16

  13. Compilation of 2003 Benchmark Reports on PET, MR and CT developed by IMV—Medical Information Division

  14. Verboom P, et al. (2003) Cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET in staging non-small cell lung cancer: the PLUS study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag 30(11)

  15. The Market for PET Radiopharmaceuticals and PET Imaging. BIO-TECH Systems, Inc. Report #220, July 2005

  16. The Market for PET Radiopharmaceuticals and PET Imaging. BIO-TECH Systems, Inc. Report #220, July 2005

  17. Benchmark Report PET 2003. IMV—Medical Information Division

  18. The Market for PET Radiopharmaceuticals and PET Imaging. BIO-TECH Systems, Inc. Report #220, July 2005

  19. Extrapolated from Benchmark Report PET 2003. IMV—Medical Information Division

  20. Medicare 2006 national APC rates for CPT 78815 and A4641

  21. The Market for PET Radiopharmaceuticals and PET Imaging. BIO-TECH Systems, Inc. Report #220, July 2005 (extrapolated: 2004 FDG sales of $270,000,000 divided by est. 1,000,000 2004 PET studies)

  22. Benchmark Report PET 2003. IMV—Medical Information Division

  23. The Market for PET Radiopharmaceuticals and PET Imaging. BIO-TECH Systems, Inc. Report #220, July 2005 (data extrapolated from est. 1,000,000 PET studies in 2004 and est. 3,200,000 PET studies in 2010)

  24. Benchmark Report PET 2003. IMV—Medical Information Division

  25. Benchmark Report PET 2003. IMV—Medical Information Division

  26. Benchmark Report PET 2003. IMV—Medical Information Division

  27. http://Monster.com 2006 Wage/benefits information

  28. Benchmark Report PET 2003. IMV—Medical Information Division

  29. The Market for PET Radiopharmaceuticals and PET Imaging. BIO-TECH Systems, Inc. Report #220, July 2005

  30. The Market for PET Radiopharmaceuticals and PET Imaging. BIO-TECH Systems, Inc. Report #220, July 2005

  31. The Market for PET Radiopharmaceuticals and PET Imaging. BIO-TECH Systems, Inc. Report #220, July 2005

  32. The Market for PET Radiopharmaceuticals and PET Imaging. BIO-TECH Systems, Inc. Report #220, July 2005

  33. Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. Title V

  34. Verboom P, et al. (2003) Cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET in staging non-small cell lung cancer: the PLUS study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag 30(11)

  35. American Cancer Society 2006 Cancer Facts and Statistics

  36. Verboom P, et al. (2003) Cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET in staging non-small cell lung cancer: the PLUS study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag 30(11). Note: Currency converted to dollars utilizing March 2, 2006 exchange rates

  37. Benchmark Report PET 2003. IMV—Medical Information Division

  38. Medicare Imaging Cuts Restrict Access to Care and Discourage New Technologies which would Benefit Patients. American College of Radiology statement dated February 2, 2006

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Trident Molecular Imaging, 1275 Hwy 54 West, Suite 103, Fayetteville, GA, 30214, USA

    Guy Messer & Fred Stuvek

  2. Strategic Outpatient Services, New York, NY, USA

    Jason DeSalvo

Authors
  1. Guy Messer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fred Stuvek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jason DeSalvo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guy Messer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Messer, G., Stuvek, F. & DeSalvo, J. Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 and its Adverse Impact on Medicare Beneficiary Access to Positron Emission Tomography. Mol Imaging Biol 8, 254–261 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-006-0054-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-006-0054-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation