NEVVI Medicare utilization intelligence
+ Build a code basket
Market snapshot

Nationwide CY2024

Medicare Part B FFS · CY2024 · as published by CMS
22844 Placement of stabilizing device to back, 13 or more spine bone segments CPT · Musculoskeletal procedure
Classification Procedure Musculoskeletal Arthrodesis - Spine (CMS RBCS)
First observed 2013 — start of our 12-year window; the code predates it
National scale 268 services ▲ 34.7% YoY · 267 beneficiaries (CY2024, Medicare FFS)
Medicare paid $162K · $604.63 avg / service, national
CMS descriptor · RBCS classification · Medicare Part B physician/supplier claims, 12-year window
Billing groups
9
Named-group FFS services
231
FFS of Medicare
49%
Services YoY
+34.7%
FFS enrollment -2.2%
Estimated all-Medicare volume FFS + estimated MA estimate
~476 services

231 observed fee-for-service (49%) · ~245 estimated Medicare Advantage. Scaled from the observed floor by each state’s fee-for-service share (FFS share as of 2024) — scaled estimate — assumes MA utilization mirrors FFS; not an observation. How we scale

Top states — 22844 (CY2024)

Disclosed Medicare fee-for-service services by billing state; open a bar for that state's ranked market.

Named-group submitted charges
$1.1M
Named-group allowed amount
$168K
Named-group Medicare payments
$134K
Avg charge / svc
$4,677
Avg allowed / svc
$728
Avg payment / svc
$580
Average charge per group
$457 9 groups · avg submitted charge / service $15,646
Market analyticsPlatform
a taste of the twelve-year trend layer

Or just look at it: nuclear heart imaging (78452) in Arizona is open as a live example — the full paid view, real data.

View the live example →

Nevvi's market analytics platform — code baskets, market structure and share, the twelve-year trend layer — is built and not launched yet. We're gathering interest in it.

Notify me at launch →
Refine: practice size any 5+ 25+ 100+ independent only
Filter results:

Email me this CSV

Data year: CY2024 CY2023 CY2022 locked column CY2021 locked column CY2020 locked column
Physician groups ranked by 22844 services, highest first, CY2024
# Physician group activate to sort City activate to sort St activate to sort Specialty activate to sort Providers activate to sort 22844 svcs sorted descending — activate to reverse Submitted charges activate to sort Avg charge activate to sort Medicare $ locked column Share* activate to sort Phone
1 UCSF MEDICAL GROUP BUSINESS SERVICES SAN FRANCISCO CA DIAGNOSTIC RADIOLOGY 1548 98 $519,543 $5,301 premium 59.0% (415) 476-1000
2 SUTTER VALLEY MEDICAL FOUNDATION SACRAMENTO CA DIAGNOSTIC RADIOLOGY 2420 31 $89,111 $2,875 premium 18.7% (916) 681-8852
3 SCRIPPS HEALTH LA JOLLA CA PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT 1431 23 $81,458 $3,542 premium 13.9% (858) 455-9100
4 SAINT THOMAS MEDICAL PARTNERS NASHVILLE TN NURSE PRACTITIONER 591 17 $37,995 $2,235 premium 54.8% (615) 269-4545
5 AP OF NASHVILLE, LLC NASHVILLE TN PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT 18 14 $6,398 $457 premium 45.2% (615) 222-2111
6 CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER WEST HOLLYWOOD CA NURSE PRACTITIONER 802 14 $68,170 $4,869 premium 8.4% (310) 423-3277
7 MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL PHYSICIANS ORGANIZATION INC BOSTON FL DIAGNOSTIC RADIOLOGY 3532 12 $63,300 $5,275 premium 100.0% (617) 724-0287
8 WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SAINT LOUIS MO NURSE PRACTITIONER 3070 11 $42,350 $3,850 premium 50.0% (314) 747-3000
9 NEW YORK UNIVERSITY NEW YORK NY DIAGNOSTIC RADIOLOGY 5704 11 $172,104 $15,646 premium 100.0% (212) 263-9700

*Share of the state's disclosed Medicare-FFS services for the primary code, counted once per clinician. "St" is the state the volume was billed from: a group appears in each state where its clinicians bill Medicare, with that state's volume and share ("City" is the group's registered location). Group figures sum clinicians affiliated with exactly one group; clinicians in several groups are listed in each group's drill-down but not volume-attributed to any single group, so shares reflect attributable volume. See Methods.

Comparing against an all-payer estimate?

These are exact counts from Medicare fee-for-service claims — roughly a third to half of most procedure markets, depending on payer mix. Modeled all-payer databases project the remainder statistically; we publish the audited floor and label it as such. Same market, different denominator. How the numbers reconcile →