Skip to content
  • About
  • Contact
  • Contribute
  • Book
  • Careers
  • Podcast
  • Recommended
  • Speaking
  • All
  • Physician
  • Practice
  • Policy
  • Finance
  • Conditions
  • .edu
  • Patient
  • Meds
  • Tech
  • Social
  • Video
    • All
    • Physician
    • Practice
    • Policy
    • Finance
    • Conditions
    • .edu
    • Patient
    • Meds
    • Tech
    • Social
    • Video
    • About
    • Contact
    • Contribute
    • Book
    • Careers
    • Podcast
    • Recommended
    • Speaking

Restricting nuclear cardiac stress testing in favor of stress echocardiography

Adam Rothschild, MD
Conditions
March 24, 2011
Share
Tweet
Share

Dr. William Follansbee is the chairman of the American College of Cardiology/American Society of Nuclear Cardiology (ACC/ASNC) task force on non-invasive cardiac imaging and the director of nuclear cardiology at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Cardiovascular Institute.

He recently published an editorial in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette in which he criticized the local Blue Cross/Blue Shield carrier, Highmark, for restricting the use of nuclear cardiac stress testing in favor of sonographic cardiac stress testing (a.k.a. stress echocardiography). Dr. Follansbee made several arguments as to why he believed that Highmark’s restriction of nuclear cardiac stress testing was wrong.

One of his core arguments is that “patients will be … denied access to appropriately indicated nuclear cardiology tests ordered by their physicians.” He (indirectly) references the ACC’s 2009 Appropriate Use Criteria for Cardiac Radionuclide Imaging in support of this argument. This document identifies clinical scenarios where a group of experts reached consensus that nuclear cardiac stress testing was appropriate.

Dr. Follansbee fails to mention that the ACC also publishes an analogous document called 2008 Appropriateness Criteria for Stress Echocardiography,which uses the same methodology to identify clinical scenarios where a group of experts reached consensus that sonographic cardiac stress testing was appropriate and which illustrates that indications and test performance characteristics for nuclear and echocardiographic stress testing are virtually the same. That said, neither of these ACC documents explicitly identifies where nuclear cardiac stress testing is preferable to sonographic cardiac stress testing and vice versa.

Appropriateness criteria give a semblance of objectivity as to when cardiac stress testing is indicated, but since there are many situations in which the ACC suggests that both nuclear and echocardiographic stress testing are indicated, they give no explicit guidance on which modality is preferred in a situation in which when they are both indicated. The question that doctors like me actually need answered is two-fold: For a given clinical situation 1) is a cardiac stress test indicated and 2) should I order a nuclear or echocardiographic stress test?

Since the ACC cardiac stress testing appropriateness criteria guidelines did not address which testing modality is preferred where they are both indicated, Highmark did. Although Highmark’s answer apparently did not meet Dr. Follansbee’s approval, their preference of sonographic over nuclear cardiac stress testing actually makes a lot of sense.

All other things being equal, a safer test is preferable to a riskier test, and a less expensive test is preferable to a more expensive test. Guess what? With respect to “all other things,” nuclear and sonographic cardiac stress testing are essentially equal; even the ACC’s appropriateness criteria say so: “The overwhelming majority of final ratings of cardiac RNI [i.e., nuclear stress testing] and stress echocardiography [i.e., sonographic stress testing] were concordant for similar clinical indications.” Nuclear and sonographic cardiac stress testing have nearly identical sensitivities and specificities; if anything, the specificity of sonographic cardiac stress testing even seems to be somewhat better.

Guess what else? Sonographic cardiac stress testing is safer than nuclear cardiac stress testing because it does not use carcinogenic ionizing radiation, and sonographic cardiac stress testing is significantly less expensive than nuclear cardiac stress testing. As such, Highmark’s preference of sonographic cardiac stress testing over nuclear cardiac stress testing is appropriate.

It’s no longer news that America’s health care costs are high and rising with no improvement in our mediocre quality. Through its justified preference of sonographic to nuclear cardiac stress testing, Highmark has identified a way to safely improve (or at worst not decrease) quality and simultaneously decrease cost. This is win-win and a powerful example of comparative effectiveness research, although not referred to as such. I do not know whose interests Dr. Follansbee primarily had at heart in arguing for less safe, more expensive, and no more accurate nuclear cardiac stress testing over sonographic cardiac stress testing, but it seems to me that it was neither individual patients nor society at large. Regardless, the ACC should issue a guideline that explicitly states when sonographic cardiac stress testing is preferred to nuclear and vice versa. Sure, this would likely anger many cardiologists and nuclear medicine physicians who make a nice living performing nuclear stress testing, but we should practice medicine with our patients’ best interests primarily at heart, not our own.

Adam Rothschild is a family physician and the CEO of Doctrelo.  He blogs at The Doctrelo Blog.

 

Submit a guest post and be heard on social media’s leading physician voice.

Prev

Patient volume and money instead of quality patient care

March 24, 2011 Kevin 21
…
Next

Expand health care systems in a way that is professionally satisfying

March 24, 2011 Kevin 5
…

Tagged as: Cardiology, Hospital-Based Medicine, Public Health & Policy, Specialist

Post navigation

< Previous Post
Patient volume and money instead of quality patient care
Next Post >
Expand health care systems in a way that is professionally satisfying

ADVERTISEMENT

More by Adam Rothschild, MD

  • a desk with keyboard and ipad with the kevinmd logo

    Consider the cost when choosing a medical school

    Adam Rothschild, MD
  • a desk with keyboard and ipad with the kevinmd logo

    Who benefits from computerization of patient-specific clinical information?

    Adam Rothschild, MD

More in Conditions

  • How denial of hypertension endangers lives and what doctors can do

    Dr. Aminat O. Akintola
  • How physicians can reclaim resilience through better sleep, nutrition, and exercise

    Kim Downey, PT & Shirish Sachdeva, PT, DPT & Ziya Altug, PT, DPT
  • Who are you outside of the white coat?

    Annia Raja, PhD
  • How hospitals can prepare for CMS’s new patient safety rule

    Kim Adelman, PhD
  • The humanity we bring: a call to hold space in medicine

    Kathleen Muldoon, PhD
  • The truth about fat in whole milk and your health

    Larry Kaskel, MD
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • Love, birds, and fries: a story of innocence and connection

      Dr. Damane Zehra | Physician
    • How a doctor defied a hurricane to save a life

      Dharam Persaud-Sharma, MD, PhD | Physician
    • Why primary care needs better dermatology training

      Alex Siauw | Conditions
    • Why physician strikes are a form of hospice

      Patrick Hudson, MD | Physician
    • Private practice employment agreements: What happens if private equity swoops in?

      Dennis Hursh, Esq | Conditions
    • How an insider advocate can save a loved one

      Chrissie Ott, MD | Physician
  • Past 6 Months

    • Why transgender health care needs urgent reform and inclusive practices

      Angela Rodriguez, MD | Conditions
    • COVID-19 was real: a doctor’s frontline account

      Randall S. Fong, MD | Conditions
    • Why primary care doctors are drowning in debt despite saving lives

      John Wei, MD | Physician
    • Confessions of a lipidologist in recovery: the infection we’ve ignored for 40 years

      Larry Kaskel, MD | Conditions
    • Why taxing remittances harms families and global health care

      Dalia Saha, MD | Finance
    • mRNA post vaccination syndrome: Is it real?

      Harry Oken, MD | Conditions
  • Recent Posts

    • How an insider advocate can save a loved one

      Chrissie Ott, MD | Physician
    • Why medical notes have become billing scripts instead of patient stories

      Sriman Swarup, MD, MBA | Tech
    • A powerful story of addiction, strength, and redemption

      Ryan McCarthy, MD | Physician
    • An ER nurse explains why the system is collapsing [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Why reforming medical boards is critical to saving patient care

      Kayvan Haddadan, MD | Physician
    • How denial of hypertension endangers lives and what doctors can do

      Dr. Aminat O. Akintola | Conditions

Subscribe to KevinMD and never miss a story!

Get free updates delivered free to your inbox.


Find jobs at
Careers by KevinMD.com

Search thousands of physician, PA, NP, and CRNA jobs now.

Learn more

View 3 Comments >

Founded in 2004 by Kevin Pho, MD, KevinMD.com is the web’s leading platform where physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, medical students, and patients share their insight and tell their stories.

Social

  • Like on Facebook
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Connect on Linkedin
  • Subscribe on Youtube
  • Instagram

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • Love, birds, and fries: a story of innocence and connection

      Dr. Damane Zehra | Physician
    • How a doctor defied a hurricane to save a life

      Dharam Persaud-Sharma, MD, PhD | Physician
    • Why primary care needs better dermatology training

      Alex Siauw | Conditions
    • Why physician strikes are a form of hospice

      Patrick Hudson, MD | Physician
    • Private practice employment agreements: What happens if private equity swoops in?

      Dennis Hursh, Esq | Conditions
    • How an insider advocate can save a loved one

      Chrissie Ott, MD | Physician
  • Past 6 Months

    • Why transgender health care needs urgent reform and inclusive practices

      Angela Rodriguez, MD | Conditions
    • COVID-19 was real: a doctor’s frontline account

      Randall S. Fong, MD | Conditions
    • Why primary care doctors are drowning in debt despite saving lives

      John Wei, MD | Physician
    • Confessions of a lipidologist in recovery: the infection we’ve ignored for 40 years

      Larry Kaskel, MD | Conditions
    • Why taxing remittances harms families and global health care

      Dalia Saha, MD | Finance
    • mRNA post vaccination syndrome: Is it real?

      Harry Oken, MD | Conditions
  • Recent Posts

    • How an insider advocate can save a loved one

      Chrissie Ott, MD | Physician
    • Why medical notes have become billing scripts instead of patient stories

      Sriman Swarup, MD, MBA | Tech
    • A powerful story of addiction, strength, and redemption

      Ryan McCarthy, MD | Physician
    • An ER nurse explains why the system is collapsing [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Why reforming medical boards is critical to saving patient care

      Kayvan Haddadan, MD | Physician
    • How denial of hypertension endangers lives and what doctors can do

      Dr. Aminat O. Akintola | Conditions

MedPage Today Professional

An Everyday Health Property Medpage Today
  • Terms of Use | Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA Policy
All Content © KevinMD, LLC
Site by Outthink Group

Restricting nuclear cardiac stress testing in favor of stress echocardiography
3 comments

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

Loading Comments...