The study, published in the Journal of the American College of Radiology (JACR), was based on 1.3 million Medicare imaging claims between 2013 and 2022. Researchers compared repeat imaging rates for studies initially interpreted by NPPs to those initially interpreted by radiologists and examined whether the patient had repeat imaging in the same imaging family (i.e., same anatomic region and imaging modality) within 90 days. “After adjusting for patient characteristics, the odds of repeat imaging for NPP versus radiologist interpreted studies were 35%, 141%, and 156% higher for radiography, ultrasound, and MR, respectively.”The authors note that while the study cannot determine the ideal repeat imaging rate, the differences suggest that interpretation by radiologists may help reduce avoidable imaging. “Repeat imaging is a potential source of unnecessary imaging when it can be avoided with high quality initial imaging,” said Elizabeth Rula, PhD, Executive Director of the Neiman Institute. “The lower repeat imaging rates we observed for studies interpreted by a radiologist underscores the importance of specialized training in diagnostic imaging.