Skip to main content

The AHRQ National Quality Measures Clearinghouse (NQMC, qualitymeasures.ahrq.gov) Web site will not be available after July 16, 2018 because federal funding
through AHRQ will no longer be available to support the NQMC as of that date. For additional information, read our full announcement.
  • Measure Summary
  • NQMC:010209
  • Feb 2015

Diagnostic imaging: percentage of final reports for patients aged 18 years and older who had a previously documented iodinated contrast reaction who undergo any imaging examination using intravenous iodinated contrast that include documentation that the patients were pre-medicated with corticosteroids with or without H1 antihistamines.

American College of Radiology (ACR), American Medical Association-convened Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement® (PCPI®), National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA). Diagnostic imaging performance measurement set. Reston (VA): American College of Radiology (ACR); 2015 Feb. 58 p. [89 references]

View the original measure documentation External Web Site Policy

This is the current release of the measure.

  • Save

Primary Measure Domain

Clinical Quality Measures: Process

Secondary Measure Domain

Does not apply to this measure

Description

This measure is used to assess the percentage of final reports for patients aged 18 years and older who had a previously documented iodinated contrast reaction who undergo any imaging examination using intravenous iodinated contrast that include documentation that the patients were pre-medicated with corticosteroids with or without H1 antihistamines.

Rationale

Reactions to contrast media are common, occurring in as many as 13% of patients (Bush & Swanson, 1991). Most reactions are mild, with severe reactions occurring in less than 1% of cases (American College of Radiology [ACR] Committee on Drugs and Contrast Media, 2013). Premedication with corticosteroids has been shown to reduce the rate of contrast reactions by as much as 35% among "high risk" patients who have had a previous reaction to contrast media (Lasser et al., 1994).

The following evidence statements are quoted verbatim from the referenced clinical guidelines and other references:

The primary indication for premedication is pre-treatment of "at-risk" patients who require contrast media. In this context, "at-risk" means at higher risk for an acute allergic-like reaction (ACR Committee on Drugs and Contrast Media, 2013).

Before deciding to premedicate an "at-risk" patient, some consideration should be given to the goals of such premedication. Ideally, one would like to prevent all contrast reactions, including minor, moderate, and severe ones. However, it is most important to target premedication to those who, in the past, have had moderately severe or severe reactions requiring treatment (ACR Committee on Drugs and Contrast Media, 2013).

No premedication strategy should be a substitute for the preadministration preparedness discussed in this manual. Contrast reactions occur despite premedication prophylaxis. The radiologist must be prepared and able to treat these reactions. Most commonly, a repeat reaction will be similar to the patients' initial reaction; however, there is a chance that a recurrent reaction will be more or less severe (ACR Committee on Drugs and Contrast Media, 2013).

Evidence for Rationale

ACR Committee on Drugs and Contrast Media. ACR manual on contrast media [version 9]. Reston (VA): American College of Radiology; 2013. 128 p.

American College of Radiology (ACR), American Medical Association-convened Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement® (PCPI®), National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA). Diagnostic imaging performance measurement set. Reston (VA): American College of Radiology (ACR); 2015 Feb. 58 p. [89 references]

Bush WH, Swanson DP. Acute reactions to intravascular contrast media: types, risk factors, recognition, and specific treatment. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1991 Dec;157(6):1153-61. PubMed External Web Site Policy

Lasser EC, Berry CC, Mishkin MM, Williamson B, Zheutlin N, Silverman JM. Pretreatment with corticosteroids to prevent adverse reactions to nonionic contrast media. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1994 Mar;162(3):523-6. PubMed External Web Site Policy

Primary Health Components

Iodinated contrast reaction; imaging examination; intravenous iodinated contrast; premedication; corticosteroids; H1 antihistamines

Denominator Description

All final reports for patients aged 18 years and older with a previously documented iodinated contrast reaction who undergo any imaging examination using intravenous iodinated contrast (see the related "Denominator Inclusions/Exclusions" field)

Numerator Description

Final reports for patients 18 years and older who were pre-medicated with corticosteroids with or without H1 antihistamines

Type of Evidence Supporting the Criterion of Quality for the Measure

  • A clinical practice guideline or other peer-reviewed synthesis of the clinical research evidence
  • A formal consensus procedure, involving experts in relevant clinical, methodological, public health and organizational sciences
  • One or more research studies published in a National Library of Medicine (NLM) indexed, peer-reviewed journal

Additional Information Supporting Need for the Measure

Importance of Topic
As imaging technology continues to advance, the United States healthcare system has seen an increase in both the type and frequency of imaging studies being performed. The increase in utilization of imaging studies is accompanied by a corresponding increase in cost and exposure to radiation for both patients and healthcare professionals.

  • From 1980 to 2006, the number of radiologic procedures performed in the United States showed a ten-fold increase while the annual per-capita effective dose from radiologic and nuclear medicine procedures increased by 600% (Mettler et al., 2009).
  • From 1996 to 2010, the number of computerized tomographic (CT) examinations tripled, while the number of ultrasounds nearly doubled (Smith-Bindman et al., 2012).
  • From 1996 to 2010, advanced diagnostic imaging (i.e., CT, magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], nuclear medicine, and ultrasound) accounted for approximately 35% of all imaging studies (Smith-Bindman et al., 2012).
  • From 1980 to 2006, the proportion of radiation exposure that is attributable to medical sources increased from 17% to 53% (Mettler et al., 2009).
  • In 2006, while CT scans only accounted for approximately 17% of all radiologic procedures performed in the United States, they accounted for over 65% of the total effective radiation dose from radiologic procedures (Mettler et al., 2009).
  • In 2006, the estimated per-capita effective radiation dose for radiologic procedures in the United States was nearly 20% higher than the average for other well-developed countries (Mettler et al., 2009).

Diagnostic imaging was prioritized as a topic area for measure development due to a high level of utilization, rising costs, and the need for measures to help promote appropriate use of imaging and improve outcomes.

Opportunity for Improvement
In a 2011 survey (O'Malley et al., 2011) of uroradiologists, 86% of respondents reported having a standardized premedication regimen. Additionally, the survey found significant variability in the use of premedication for specific clinical scenarios such as an urgent or emergent situation.

Evidence for Additional Information Supporting Need for the Measure

American College of Radiology (ACR), American Medical Association-convened Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement® (PCPI®), National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA). Diagnostic imaging performance measurement set. Reston (VA): American College of Radiology (ACR); 2015 Feb. 58 p. [89 references]

Mettler FA, Bhargavan M, Faulkner K, Gilley DB, Gray JE, Ibbott GS, Lipoti JA, Mahesh M, McCrohan JL, Stabin MG, Thomadsen BR, Yoshizumi TT. Radiologic and nuclear medicine studies in the United States and worldwide: frequency, radiation dose, and comparison with other radiation sources--1950-2007. Radiology. 2009 Nov;253(2):520-31. PubMed External Web Site Policy

O'Malley RB, Cohan RH, Ellis JH, Caoili EM, Davenport MS, Dillman JR, Khalatbari S, Myles JD. A survey on the use of premedication prior to iodinated and gadolinium-based contrast material administration. J Am Coll Radiol. 2011 May;8(5):345-54. PubMed External Web Site Policy

Smith-Bindman R, Miglioretti DL, Johnson E, Lee C, Feigelson HS, Flynn M, Greenlee RT, Kruger RL, Hornbrook MC, Roblin D, Solberg LI, Vanneman N, Weinmann S, Williams AE. Use of diagnostic imaging studies and associated radiation exposure for patients enrolled in large integrated health care systems, 1996-2010. JAMA. 2012 Jun 13;307(22):2400-9. PubMed External Web Site Policy

Extent of Measure Testing

Some of the measures in this set are being made available without any prior testing. The Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement (PCPI) recognizes the importance of testing all of its measures and encourages testing of the diagnostic imaging measurement set for feasibility and reliability by organizations or individuals positioned to do so. The Measure Testing Protocol for PCPI Measures was approved by the PCPI in 2010 and is available on the PCPI Web site (see Position Papers at www.physicianconsortium.org External Web Site Policy); interested parties are encouraged to review this document and to contact PCPI staff. The PCPI will welcome any opportunity to promote the initial testing of these measures and to ensure that any results available from testing are used to refine the measures before implementation.

Evidence for Extent of Measure Testing

American College of Radiology (ACR), American Medical Association-convened Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement® (PCPI®), National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA). Diagnostic imaging performance measurement set. Reston (VA): American College of Radiology (ACR); 2015 Feb. 58 p. [89 references]

State of Use

Current routine use

Current Use

Internal quality improvement

Professional certification

Measurement Setting

Ambulatory/Office-based Care

Ambulatory Procedure/Imaging Center

Hospital Inpatient

Hospital Outpatient

Long-term Care Facilities - Other

Skilled Nursing Facilities/Nursing Homes

Professionals Involved in Delivery of Health Services

Physicians

Least Aggregated Level of Services Delivery Addressed

Individual Clinicians or Public Health Professionals

Statement of Acceptable Minimum Sample Size

Does not apply to this measure

Target Population Age

Age greater than or equal to 18 years

Target Population Gender

Either male or female

National Quality Strategy Aim

Better Care

National Quality Strategy Priority

Making Care Safer
Prevention and Treatment of Leading Causes of Mortality

IOM Care Need

Getting Better

IOM Domain

Effectiveness

Safety

Case Finding Period

Unspecified

Denominator Sampling Frame

Patients associated with provider

Denominator (Index) Event or Characteristic

Clinical Condition

Diagnostic Evaluation

Patient/Individual (Consumer) Characteristic

Denominator Time Window

Does not apply to this measure

Denominator Inclusions/Exclusions

Inclusions
All final reports for patients aged 18 years and older with a previously documented iodinated contrast reaction* who undergo any imaging examination using intravenous iodinated contrast

*Contrast Reaction: allergic-like reaction following a prior imaging examination with intravenous iodinated contrast.

Exclusions
Unspecified

Exceptions
None

Exclusions/Exceptions

None

Numerator Inclusions/Exclusions

Inclusions
Final reports for patients aged 18 years and older who were pre-medicated with corticosteroids with or without H1 antihistamines

Exclusions
Unspecified

Numerator Search Strategy

Fixed time period or point in time

Data Source

Electronic health/medical record

Imaging data

Paper medical record

Registry data

Type of Health State

Does not apply to this measure

Instruments Used and/or Associated with the Measure

Unspecified

Measure Specifies Disaggregation

Does not apply to this measure

Scoring

Rate/Proportion

Interpretation of Score

Desired value is a higher score

Allowance for Patient or Population Factors

Unspecified

Standard of Comparison

Internal time comparison

Original Title

Measure #9: use of premedication before contrast-enhanced imaging studies in patients with documented contrast reaction.

Measure Collection Name

Diagnostic Imaging Performance Measurement Set

Submitter

American College of Radiology - Medical Specialty Society

Developer

American College of Radiology - Medical Specialty Society

National Committee for Quality Assurance - Health Care Accreditation Organization

Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement® - Clinical Specialty Collaboration

Funding Source(s)

Unspecified

Composition of the Group that Developed the Measure

Diagnostic Imaging Measure Development Work Group Members

  • William Golden, MD (Co-chair) (internal medicine)
  • David Seidenwurm (Co-chair) (diagnostic radiology)
  • Michael Bettmann, MD
  • Dorothy Bulas, MD (pediatric radiology)
  • Rubin I. Cohen, MD, FACP, FCCP, FCCM
  • Richard T. Griffey, MD, MPH (emergency medicine)
  • Eric J. Hohenwalter, MD (vascular interventional radiology)
  • Deborah Levine, MD, FACR (radiology/ultrasound)
  • Mark Morasch, MD (vascular surgery)
  • Paul Nagy, MD, PhD (radiology)
  • Mark R. Needham, MD, MBA (family medicine)
  • Hoang D. Nguyen (diagnostic radiology/payer representative)
  • Charles J. Prestigiacomo, MD, FACS (neurosurgery)
  • William G. Preston, MD, FAAN (neurology)
  • Robert Pyatt, Jr., MD (diagnostic radiology)
  • Robert Rosenberg, MD (diagnostic radiology)
  • David A. Rubin, MD (diagnostic radiology)
  • B Winfred (B.W.) Ruffner, MD, FACP (medical oncology)
  • Frank Rybicki, MD, PhD, FAHA (diagnostic radiology)
  • Cheryl A. Sadow, MD (radiology)
  • John Schneider, MD, PhD (internal medicine)
  • Gary Schultz, DC, DACR (chiropractic)
  • Paul R. Sierzenski, MD, RDMS (emergency medicine)
  • Michael Wasylik, MD (orthopedic surgery)

Diagnostic Imaging Measure Development Work Group Staff

American College of Radiology: Judy Burleson, MHSA; Alicia Blakey, MS

American Medical Association-convened Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement: Mark Antman, DDS, MBA; Kathleen Blake, MD, MPH; Kendra Hanley, MS; Toni Kaye, MPH; Marjorie Rallins, DPM; Kimberly Smuk, RHIA; Samantha Tierney, MPH; Stavros Tsipas, MA

National Committee for Quality Assurance: Mary Barton, MD

Financial Disclosures/Other Potential Conflicts of Interest

None of the members of the Diagnostic Imaging Work Group had any disqualifying material interest under the Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement (PCPI) Conflict of Interest Policy.

Adaptation

This measure was not adapted from another source.

Date of Most Current Version in NQMC

2015 Feb

Measure Maintenance

This measure is reviewed and updated every 3 years.

Date of Next Anticipated Revision

2018

Measure Status

This is the current release of the measure.

Source(s)

American College of Radiology (ACR), American Medical Association-convened Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement® (PCPI®), National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA). Diagnostic imaging performance measurement set. Reston (VA): American College of Radiology (ACR); 2015 Feb. 58 p. [89 references]

Measure Availability

Source available from the American College of Radiology (ACR) Web site External Web Site Policy.

For more information, contact ACR at 1891 Preston White Drive, Reston, VA 20191; Phone: 703-648-8900; E-mail: info@acr.org; Web site: www.acr.org External Web Site Policy.

NQMC Status

This NQMC summary was completed by ECRI Institute on October 13, 2015. The information was verified by the measure developer on November 19, 2015.

Copyright Statement

This NQMC summary is based on the original measure, which is subject to the measure developer's copyright restrictions.

©2014 American Medical Association (AMA) and American College of Radiology (ACR). All Rights Reserved. CPT® Copyright 2004 to 2013 American Medical Association.

NQMC Disclaimer

The National Quality Measures Clearinghouse™ (NQMC) does not develop, produce, approve, or endorse the measures represented on this site.

All measures summarized by NQMC and hosted on our site are produced under the auspices of medical specialty societies, relevant professional associations, public and private organizations, other government agencies, health care organizations or plans, individuals, and similar entities.

Measures represented on the NQMC Web site are submitted by measure developers, and are screened solely to determine that they meet the NQMC Inclusion Criteria.

NQMC, AHRQ, and its contractor ECRI Institute make no warranties concerning the content or its reliability and/or validity of the quality measures and related materials represented on this site. Moreover, the views and opinions of developers or authors of measures represented on this site do not necessarily state or reflect those of NQMC, AHRQ, or its contractor, ECRI Institute, and inclusion or hosting of measures in NQMC may not be used for advertising or commercial endorsement purposes.

Readers with questions regarding measure content are directed to contact the measure developer.

About NQMC Measure Summaries

NQMC provides structured summaries containing information about measures and their development.

Measure Summary FAQs


Measure Summaries

New This Week

View more and sign up for our Newsletter

Get Adobe Reader