The Clear Health Costs blog published a two-part piece on the variable costs of MRI tests.
Excerpt of part 1:
Different facilities (hospital, radiology center, doctor’s office) charge vastly different prices for MRIs. For example, the cash price of a lumbar spine MRI at a hospital in California can reach more than $3,000, while the cash price of the same test at an independent radiology facility can be as low as $400. (For our sampling of cash or self-pay prices of lumbar spine MRIs in the San Francisco area, go here. For our sampling of cash or self-pay prices in the New York area, go here. Using our search tool for Medicare prices, you can see that several providers will undercut the government price, which is interesting.)
There are also private radiology facilities that offer exceptionally low costs, such as $295 at RPN of California, a low-cost MRI services network with headquarters in Ontario, Calif. Read more about RPN on our blog. RPN has also opened facilities in Phoenix and Tempe, Ariz., with low prices for an MRI.
Some hospitals and radiology clinics post prices online. At Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center in New Hampshire and Vermont, the price for a spine MRI is listed at $3,693.
At Metro Imaging in St. Louis, the “average charge” for an MRI is listed at $998.
At QuakerBridge Radiology in New Jersey, the self-pay price is $465.
At Denville Diagnostics in Denville, N.J., the self-pay price for an MRI without contrast is $475.
In part two of its mini-series, the Clear Health Costs blog looked at different kinds of MRIs and what additional charges there might be.
This is helpful, albeit maddeningly frustrating, information.
But what an important project Clear Health Costs is.
Opinions on other issues in news, journals, PR, advertising, marketing
The @nytimes chose to interview one of the editors of the @AnnalsofIM (publisher of this paper) who "gushed with extraordinary glee: It’s huge! There are very few things that reduce your mortality by 30%."
Turns out coffee is not one of those few things despite all that glee. https://twitter.com/garyschwitzer/status/1533202075928215558
Comments (2)
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
Jeanne Pinder
November 15, 2012 at 4:57 pmThank you so much! We are huge admirers of HealthNewsReview and the service you provide in clearing away the murk in health and medical reporting.
On costs: Now that the election is over (and post Supreme Court ruling), people are seriously focusing on the cost.
In what other marketplace could such a maddeningly opaque pricing system persist for so long? And what will it take to change it?
When someone like Andy Grove, the former Intel chairman, can write a piece like this in Wired magazine ( http://www.wired.com/business/2012/10/mf-health-care-transparency/ ) , and people like the indie rock star Amanda Palmer can conduct something like her runaway #insurancepoll,
( http://www.amandapalmer.net/blog/20121015/ ),
it starts to feel like change is at hand in the last big remaining opaque marketplace.
This is the biggest problem we face today as a nation. Together, we can fix it.
Cheers jeanne
Jeanne Pinder
November 15, 2012 at 4:57 pmThank you so much! We are huge admirers of HealthNewsReview and the service you provide in clearing away the murk in health and medical reporting.
On costs: Now that the election is over (and post Supreme Court ruling), people are seriously focusing on the cost.
In what other marketplace could such a maddeningly opaque pricing system persist for so long? And what will it take to change it?
When someone like Andy Grove, the former Intel chairman, can write a piece like this in Wired magazine ( http://www.wired.com/business/2012/10/mf-health-care-transparency/ ) , and people like the indie rock star Amanda Palmer can conduct something like her runaway #insurancepoll,
( http://www.amandapalmer.net/blog/20121015/ ),
it starts to feel like change is at hand in the last big remaining opaque marketplace.
This is the biggest problem we face today as a nation. Together, we can fix it.
Cheers jeanne
Our Comments Policy
But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.
You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.
This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.
We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don”t give medical advice so we won”t respond to questions asking for it.
We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.
There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”
The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:
We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.
And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.
The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.
You might also like