Cost analysis reveals potential savings by reducing inappropriate thyroid ultrasound use and highlights the need for improved guidelines.
Purpose Overuse of thyroid ultrasound (TUS) has contributed to rising thyroid cancer diagnoses and is projected to increase U.S. healthcare costs from $1.5 billion to $3.5 billion by 2030. This study evaluated the healthcare cost of inappropriately ordered TUS in a national multicenter academic system. Methods This is a secondary cost analysis of a retrospective cohort study across four Mayo Clinic sites (Rochester, MN; Jacksonville, FL; Scottsdale, AZ; and the Midwest Mayo Clinic Health System). Adult patients (≥18 years) undergoing their first TUS between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2021, with at least one year of follow-up, were included. TUS indications were classified as appropriate or inappropriate using a guideline-based natural language processing algorithm. The primary outcome was a comparison of adjusted 1-year all-cause healthcare costs. A secondary analysis calculated the direct procedural costs of the inappropriate TUS cascade. Results Among 6,984 patients (mean age 56 [SD 16.4]; 76.2% female; 90.9% White), 546 (7.8%) underwent TUS for inappropriate indications. These patients were younger (mean age 53.0 vs. 56.3 years, P<0.0001) but otherwise demographically similar. Adjusted total healthcare costs over 90-days and 1-year were comparable: $4,842 vs. $5,794 and $13,748 vs. $14,257 for inappropriate vs. appropriate TUS, respectively. The inappropriate TUS cascade, including an estimated 56 subsequent biopsies and 22 thyroidectomies, resulted in a minimum of $576,134 in direct procedural costs. Conclusion While adjusted total costs were similar, inappropriate TUS represents potentially avoidable spending and remains a viable target for cost-reduction strategies. Reducing low-value imaging remains a critical target for cost-saving interventions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Toro‐Tobon et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: