Comparing MRI and CT machine accessibility among urban and rural county hospitals

Abstract

Background: In 2019, Navigant Healthcare published research showing that 1 in 5 rural hospitals in Minnesota are at risk of closing as they are not financially sustainable. With 26.7% of Minnesota’s population being rural, this is particularly worrisome. A substantial cost to rural hospitals is affording the installation, maintenance and operation of Computed Tomography (CT) and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) machines. In light of the serious pressures on rural hospitals, the aim of this paper is to investigate if a disparity exists in MRI and CT machine accessibility among Minnesota’s urban and rural county hospitals.Design and Methods: Hospitals of Minnesota were contacted and asked how many MRI and CT machines they carried at their facility. This information was compiled in an excel sheet and cross referenced to the county it resided along with the counties: population, rural-urban commuting area (RUCA) classification and land area in square mileage.Results: It was found that the state of Minnesota compared well to the national average in terms of persons and square mileage per MRI and CT machine. When comparing counties of Minnesota by their RUCA classification, a disparity is found in rural counties with regards to square mileage per CT and MRI machine.Conclusions: With distance for service creating a barrier to accessibility, rural county residents would benefit from more in-hospital MRI and CT machines.  With these findings, it is pertinent further research is conducted to investigate the potential vulnerability of other rural populations with regards to accessibility to radiologic resources.