Appropriate Follow-up Imaging for Incidental Thyroid Nodules in Patients

Measure Specification

Thyroid nodules are common, with estimates of prevalence as high as 50%. Desser and Kamaya found that the majority of incidentally noted thyroid nodules were benign with approximately 5% being malignant. Due to the common nature of small thyroid nodules combined with the low malignancy, nonpalpable nodules detected on US or other anatomic imaging studies are termed incidentally discovered nodules or ‘‘incidentalomas.

’’ Nonpalpable nodules have the same risk of malignancy as palpable nodules with the same size. Generally, only nodules >1 cm should be evaluated, since they have a greater potential to be clinically significant cancers.

In patients <35 years with an incidental thyroid nodule (ITN) detected on CT, MRI, or extrathyroidal ultrasound, the Committee recommends further evaluation with dedicated thyroid ultrasound if the nodule is ≥1 cm and has no suspicious imaging features, and if the patient has normal life expectancy. In patients ≥35 years with an ITN detected on CT, MRI, or extrathyroidal ultrasound, the Committee recommends further evaluation with dedicated thyroid ultrasound if the nodule is ≥1.

5 cm and has no suspicious imaging features, and if the patient has normal life expectancy.

This measure contains one strata defined by a single submission criteria. This measure produces a single performance rate. Implementation Considerations For the purposes of MIPS implementation, this procedure measure is submitted each time a procedure is performed during the performance period. This is an inverse measure which means a lower calculated performance rate for this measure indicates better clinical care or control.

The “Performance Not Met” numerator option for this measure is the representation of the better clinical quality or control. Submitting that numerator option will produce a performance rate that trends closer to 0%, as quality increases. For inverse measures, a rate of 100% means all of the denominator eligible patients did not receive the appropriate care or were not in proper control.

Telehealth: NOT TELEHEALTH ELIGIBLE: This measure is not appropriate for nor applicable to the telehealth setting. This measure is procedure based and therefore doesn’t allow for the denominator criteria to be conducted via telehealth. It would be appropriate to remove these patients from the denominator eligible patient population. Telehealth eligibility is at the measure level for inclusion within the denominator eligible patient population and based on the measure specification definitions which are independent of changes to coding and/or billing practices.

Measure Submission: The quality data codes listed do not need to be submitted by MIPS eligible clinicians, groups, or third party intermediaries that utilize this collection type for submissions; however, these codes may be submitted for those third party intermediaries that utilize Medicare Part B claims data. The coding provided to identify the measure criteria: Denominator or Numerator, may be an example of coding that could be used to identify patients that meet the intent of this clinical topic.

When implementing this measure, please refer to the ‘Reference Coding’ section to determine if other codes or code languages that meet the intent of the criteria may also be used within the medical record to identify and/or assess patients. For more information regarding Application Programming Interface (API), please refer to the Quality Payment Program (QPP) website.