The Challenge With Clinical Radiology Electives: Student and Faculty Perspectives Identify Areas for Improvement

PurposeTo determine medical students' and radiologists’ attitude toward radiology electives at a distributed medical school and identify specific areas for improvement.MethodsDuring a single academic year, both students and faculty preceptors were surveyed anonymously following a senior radiology elective. The survey was based on an established theoretical framework for studying the educational environment which takes into account domains: (1) goal orientation, (2) organization/regulation, and (3) relationships. Mann-Whitney tests were performed to determine if there was any difference between the overall satisfaction of students and preceptors, responses from the different elective sites and students’ ratings of the domains. Statistical significance was set at P < .05. Thematic analysis was performed on the narrative comments to identify specific challenges.ResultsThe response rate was 82.0% for students (95/116) and 19.5% (31/159) for radiologists. There was no difference in responses based on elective site. Overall, the elective was viewed positively by both groups however students rated their experience as significantly better than their preceptors (P = .0012). Students viewed the relationships domain more positively than both the other two (goal orientation, P = .0001; organization/regulation, P = .0038). Thematic analysis identified that the student challenges were lack of autonomy, structured teaching, and preceptor continuity and the preceptor challenges were ambiguous learning objectives/expectations and insufficient resources.ConclusionsThe radiology elective challenges identified in this study provide educators with specific areas to target when updating radiology electives. A better elective experience may improve students' radiology knowledge and attitude towards the specialty as well as radiologists’ interest in teaching.     

Imaging-Based 3-Dimensional Printing for Improved Maxillofacial Presurgical Planning: A Single Center Case Series

Purpose3-D printing is an increasingly widespread technology that allows physical models to be constructed based on cross-sectional medical imaging data. We sought to develop a pipeline for production of 3-dimensional (3-D) models for presurgical planning and assess the value of these models for surgeons and patients.MethodsIn this institutional review board–approved, single-center case series, participating surgeons identified cases for 3-D model printing, and after obtaining patient consent, a 3-D model was produced for each of the 7 participating patients based on preoperative cross-sectional imaging. Each model was given to the surgeon to use during the surgical consent discussion and preoperative planning. Patients and surgeons completed questionnaires evaluating the quality and usefulness of the models.ResultsThe 3-D models improved surgeon confidence in their operative approach, influencing the choice of operative approach in the majority of cases. Patients and surgeons reported that the model improved patient comprehension of the surgery during the consent discussion, including risks and benefits of the surgery. Model production time was as little as 4 days, and the average per-model cost was $350.Conclusions3-D printed models are useful presurgical tools from both surgeon and patient perspectives. Development of local hospital-based 3-D printing capabilities enables model production with rapid turnaround and modest cost, representing a value-added service for radiologists to offer their surgical colleagues.     

Retrievable Inferior Vena Cava Filters: A Tertiary Centre Perspective and Quality Assurance Study

PurposeTo conduct a retrospective review and quality assurance study of inferior vena cava (IVC) filter retrieval over a two-year period at a tertiary care centre.MethodsPatients who underwent IVC filter placement or retrieval over a two-year period were identified. Medical records were reviewed for patient characteristics, filter indication, time to filter retrieval, and complications.ResultsIVC filters were placed in 229 patients between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2016. 113 retrievals were attempted and 101 filters were successfully retrieved (89.4%). Median time to first retrieval attempt was 48 days (range of 5–728). Seventy-one patients died in the interval after filter insertion before a retrieval attempt at a median time of 27 days (range of 3–430). In 17 patients, retrieval was complicated by or delayed because of penetration of IVC wall (n = 6), large thrombus burden trapped by filter (n = 5), filter tilt or migration (n = 3), and unclear reasons (n = 3). Time-to-first unsuccessful retrieval attempt was 141 days (median). Of all filters placed, 55.9% were never retrieved. Excluding deceased patients with in-situ filters (n = 71) and unsuccessful retrievals left in-situ as permanent filters (n = 5), there remains 52 patients (33%), with a median filter in-situ time of 488 days.ConclusionOur study indicates that as many as 33% of patients may have been lost to follow-up of their in-situ IVC filter. Considering widespread reports of long-term complications and the recent safety alert issued by Health Canada, it is evident that a unified strategy is needed to track patients post filter insertion.