Potential Financial Implications of Substituting Cognitive Medicine for Technical Radiation Oncology Billing Services

Abstract

Respected authors recommend broadening the radiation oncology (RO) scope-of-practice by taking more responsibility for the general medical care of our patients, directing the delivery of systemic cancer treatments that avoid the high toxicity of cytotoxic chemotherapy, managing palliative care, and supervising inpatient services for brachytherapy cases and problems related to radiation toxicity. The purpose of these changes is to increase RO involvement in clinical decision making and to avoiding becoming pigeon-holed as technicians instead of oncologists. There are no data estimating the financial implications of substituting traditional radiation oncology practice with that of an expanded clinical role. We sought to fill this void with a general proof-of-principle analysis based on current benchmark data. To determine the relative value units (RVU) of a blended radiation oncology practice, we selected the specialties of general internal medicine, hospital medicine, and palliative care as these fields most closely match the scope of the broadened clinical roles, which supporters of a more diversified radiation oncology practice typically advocate. To estimate the financial implications of a blended radiation oncology practice, we retrieved salary data by specialty and academic rank from the Clinical Practice Solutions Center report of annual RVU generation and the American Association of Medical Colleges annual faculty salary survey. For an assistant professor, this simulation estimates an 11% to 15% decrease in RVU generation for the median assistant professor operating with a 20% blended practice which, in turn, translates to a 7% to 9% decrease in total salary. The calculations for full professor demonstrate a similar decrease in total salary of approximately 8% to 9%.