Abstract 4123370: Distance to a Cardiac Imaging Center and Likelihood of Imaging Receipt: Defining Imaging Deserts

Background: Cardiovascular imaging is critical for the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular disease. Whether geographic distance to a cardiovascular imaging center (CVIC) impacts access to care is unknown. Methods: We evaluated all Medicare beneficiaries (Fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage) from 2018-2022, excluding those < 65, without continuous Medicare enrollment in the previous year, individuals missing zip code of residence, or CVICs missing zip codes. We estimated distance from the centroid of an individual’s zip code of residence to the centroid of the zip code with the nearest CVIC (defined as > 10 imaging procedures/year). Multivariable regression models were used to estimate likelihood of imaging receipt by distance. Results/Data: A total of 64,260,530 individuals (age 73.0 ± 8 years, 54.6% female, 80.1% White) received care at 3,886 CVICS. The vast majority (95%) lived within 16 miles of a CVIC, but varied considerably by modality with substantially greater distances for cardiac CT, cardiac MRI, and PET (Median [IQR] distance in miles to CVIC, Echo: 3.4 [0.4-7.0]; SPECT: 3.8 [1.3-7.9]; cardiac CT: 8.1 [3.7-21.3]; cardiac MRI: 17.4 [7.3-43.3]; PET: 88.9 [26.2-194.6]). CVICs performing cardiac CT, cardiac MRI, or PET were nearly all in metropolitan locations. Likelihood of imaging receipt was triphasic: lowest within 0-10 miles of a CVIC (mainly metropolitan locations), greater within 10-15 miles, and then increasingly lower beyond 15 miles ( Figure 1 ). Sites beyond the 16-mile threshold were predominantly in the Midwest and West ( Figure 2 ). Conclusions: In this study of 64 million Medicare beneficiaries, 2018-2022, 95% of the US population was found to live within 16 miles of a CVIC, though varied by modality. While those living > 16 miles from a CVIC received less imaging, the lowest use was identified among individuals living in the same zip code as a CVIC, suggesting a possible disconnect between access to imaging care and proximity.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Circulation
Published
2024-11-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1161/circ.150.suppl_1.4123370
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Radiation Dose and Imaging
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.40
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Abstract 4123370: Distance to a Cardiac Imaging Center and Likelihood of Imaging Receipt: Defining Imaging Deserts

Jordan B. Strom, Rishi K. Wadhera, Nicholas Spetko, Hibiki Orui et al.
1 citations
Circulation
Radiation Dose and Imaging
0.40
article

Abstract 4123370: Distance to a Cardiac Imaging Center and Likelihood of Imaging Receipt: Defining Imaging Deserts

Jordan B. Strom, Rishi K. Wadhera, Nicholas Spetko, Hibiki Orui, Sanjay Divakaran, Marcelo F. Di Carli, Constance Angell-James, Yang Song, Madeline Cassidy, Ron Blankstein
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Background: Cardiovascular imaging is critical for the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular disease. Whether geographic distance to a cardiovascular imaging center (CVIC) impacts access to care is unknown. Methods: We evaluated all Medicare beneficiaries (Fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage) from 2018-2022, excluding those < 65, without continuous Medicare enrollment in the previous year, individuals missing zip code of residence, or CVICs missing zip codes. We estimated distance from the centroid of an individual’s zip code of residence to the centroid of the zip code with the nearest CVIC (defined as > 10 imaging procedures/year). Multivariable regression models were used to estimate likelihood of imaging receipt by distance. Results/Data: A total of 64,260,530 individuals (age 73.0 ± 8 years, 54.6% female, 80.1% White) received care at 3,886 CVICS. The vast majority (95%) lived within 16 miles of a CVIC, but varied considerably by modality with substantially greater distances for cardiac CT, cardiac MRI, and PET (Median [IQR] distance in miles to CVIC, Echo: 3.4 [0.4-7.0]; SPECT: 3.8 [1.3-7.9]; cardiac CT: 8.1 [3.7-21.3]; cardiac MRI: 17.4 [7.3-43.3]; PET: 88.9 [26.2-194.6]). CVICs performing cardiac CT, cardiac MRI, or PET were nearly all in metropolitan locations. Likelihood of imaging receipt was triphasic: lowest within 0-10 miles of a CVIC (mainly metropolitan locations), greater within 10-15 miles, and then increasingly lower beyond 15 miles ( Figure 1 ). Sites beyond the 16-mile threshold were predominantly in the Midwest and West ( Figure 2 ). Conclusions: In this study of 64 million Medicare beneficiaries, 2018-2022, 95% of the US population was found to live within 16 miles of a CVIC, though varied by modality. While those living > 16 miles from a CVIC received less imaging, the lowest use was identified among individuals living in the same zip code as a CVIC, suggesting a possible disconnect between access to imaging care and proximity.

CirculationVol. 150(Suppl_1)
Brigham and Women's Hospital (US), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 33%
Radiation Dose and Imaging
0.40
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.