Impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic on Imaging Case Volumes

ObjectiveThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had significant economic impact on radiology with markedly decreased imaging case volumes. The purpose of this study was to quantify the imaging volumes during the COVID-19 pandemic across patient service locations and imaging modality types.MethodsImaging case volumes in a large health care system were retrospectively studied, analyzing weekly imaging volumes by patient service locations (emergency department, inpatient, outpatient) and modality types (x-ray, mammography, CT, MRI, ultrasound, interventional radiology, nuclear medicine) in years 2020 and 2019. The data set was split to compare pre-COVID-19 (weeks 1-9) and post-COVID-19 (weeks 10-16) periods. Independent-samples t tests compared the mean weekly volumes in 2020 and 2019.ResultsTotal imaging volume in 2020 (weeks 1-16) declined by 12.29% (from 522,645 to 458,438) compared with 2019. Post-COVID-19 (weeks 10-16) revealed a greater decrease (28.10%) in imaging volumes across all patient service locations (range 13.60%-56.59%) and modality types (range 14.22%-58.42%). Total mean weekly volume in 2020 post-COVID-19 (24,383 [95% confidence interval 19,478-29,288]) was statistically reduced (P = .003) compared with 33,913 [95% confidence interval 33,429-34,396] in 2019 across all patient service locations and modality types. The greatest decline in 2020 was seen at week 16 specifically for outpatient imaging (88%) affecting all modality types: mammography (94%), nuclear medicine (85%), MRI (74%), ultrasound (64%), interventional (56%), CT (46%), and x-ray (22%).DiscussionBecause the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic remains uncertain, these results may assist in guiding short- and long-term practice decisions based on the magnitude of imaging volume decline across different patient service locations and specific imaging modality types.     

Recovery of outpatient imaging utilization during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic

ObjectiveDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, Radiology practices experienced marked reductions in outpatient imaging volumes. Our purpose was to evaluate the timing, rate, and degree of recovery of outpatient imaging during the first wave of the pandemic. We also sought to ascertain the relationship of outpatient imaging recovery to the incidence of COVID-19 cases.MethodsRetrospective study of outpatient imaging volumes in a large healthcare system was performed from January 1, 2019-August 25, 2020. Dataset was split to compare Pre-COVID (weeks 1–9), Peak-COVID (weeks 10–15) and Recovery-COVID (weeks 16–34) periods. Chi-square and Independent-samples t-tests compared weekly outpatient imaging volumes in 2020 and 2019. Regression analyses assessed the rate of decline and recovery in Peak-COVID and Recovery-COVID periods, respectively.ResultsTotal outpatient imaging volume in 2020 (weeks 1–34) was 327,738 exams, compared to 440,314 in 2019. The 2020 mean weekly imaging volumes were significantly decreased in Peak-COVID (p = 0.0148) and Recovery-COVID (p = 0.0003) periods. Mean weekly decline rate was −2580 exams/week and recovery rate was +617 exams/week. The 2020 Post-COVID (weeks 10–34) period had an average decrease of 36.5% (4813.4/13,178.6) imaging exams/week and total estimated decrease of 120,335 exams. Significant inverse correlation (−0.8338, p < 0.0001) was seen between positive-tested COVID-19 cases and imaging utilization with 1-week lag during Post-COVID (weeks 10–34) period.ConclusionRecovery of outpatient imaging volume during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic showed a gradual return to pre-pandemic levels over the course of 3–4 months. The rate of imaging utilization was inversely associated with new positive-tested COVID-19 cases with a 1-week lag.     

Radiology Imaging Volume Changes During Discrete COVID-19 Pandemic Waves: Implications for the Delta Variant of Coronavirus and Future Pandemics

PurposeThe aim of this study was to evaluate radiology imaging volumes at distinct time periods throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic as a function of regional COVID-19 hospitalizations.MethodsRadiology imaging volumes and statewide COVID-19 hospitalizations were collected, and four 28-day time periods throughout the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 were analyzed: pre–COVID-19 in January, the “first wave” of COVID-19 hospitalizations in April, the “recovery” time period in the summer of 2020 with a relative nadir of COVID-19 hospitalizations, and the “third wave” of COVID-19 hospitalizations in November. Imaging studies were categorized as inpatient, outpatient, or emergency department on the basis of patient location at the time of acquisition. A Mann-Whitney U test was performed to compare daily imaging volumes during each discrete 28-day time period.ResultsImaging volumes overall during the first wave of COVID-19 infections were 55% (11,098/20,011; P < .001) of pre–COVID-19 imaging volumes. Overall imaging volumes returned during the recovery time period to 99% (19,915/20,011; P = .725), and third-wave imaging volumes compared with the pre–COVID-19 period were significantly lower in the emergency department at 88.8% (7,951/8,955; P < .001), significantly higher for outpatients at 115.7% (8,818/7,621; P = .008), not significantly different for inpatients at 106% (3,650/3,435; P = .053), and overall unchanged when aggregated together at 102% (20,419/20,011; P = .629).ConclusionsMedical imaging rebounded after the first wave of COVID-19 hospitalizations, with relative stability of utilization over the ensuing phases of the pandemic. As widespread COVID-19 vaccination continues to occur, future surges in COVID-19 hospitalizations will likely have a negligible impact on imaging utilization.     

Impact of COVID-19 social distancing regulations on outpatient diagnostic imaging volumes and no-show rates

BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has significantly impacted outpatient radiology practices, necessitating change in practice infrastructure and workflow.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to assess the consequences of social distancing regulations on 1) outpatient imaging volume and 2) no-show rates per imaging modality.MethodsVolume and no-show rates of a large, multicenter metropolitan healthcare system outpatient practice were retrospectively stratified by modality including radiography, CT, MRI, ultrasonography, PET, DEXA, and mammography from January 2 to July 21, 2020. Trends were assessed relative to timepoints of significant state and local social distancing regulatory changes.ResultsThe decline in imaging volume and rise in no-show rates was first noted on March 10, 2020 following the declaration of a state of emergency in New York State (NYS). Total outpatient imaging volume declined 85% from baseline over the following 5 days. Decreases varied by modality: 88% for radiography, 75% for CT, 73% for MR, 61% for PET, 80% for ultrasonography, 90% for DEXA, and 85% for mammography. Imaging volume and no-show rate recovery preceded the mask mandate of April 15, 2020, and further trended along with New York City's reopening phases. No-show rates recovered within 2 months of the height of the pandemic, however, outpatient imaging volume has yet to recover to baseline after 3 months.ConclusionThe total outpatient imaging volume declined alongside an increase in the no-show rate following the declaration of a state of emergency in NYS. No-show rates recovered within 2 months of the height of the pandemic with imaging volume yet to recover after 3 months.Clinical impactUnderstanding the impact of social distancing regulations on outpatient imaging volume and no-show rates can potentially aid other outpatient radiology practices and healthcare systems in anticipating upcoming changes as the COVID-19 pandemic evolves.     

Initial Impact of COVID-19 on Radiology Practices: An ACR/RBMA Survey

PurposeThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic affected radiology practices in many ways. The aim of this survey was to estimate declines in imaging volumes and financial impact across different practice settings during April 2020.MethodsThe survey, comprising 48 questions, was conducted among members of the ACR and the Radiology Business Management Association during May 2020. Survey questions focused on practice demographics, volumes, financials, personnel and staff adjustments, and anticipation of recovery.ResultsDuring April 2020, nearly all radiology practices reported substantial (56.4%-63.7%) declines in imaging volumes, with outpatient imaging volumes most severely affected. Mean gross charges declined by 50.1% to 54.8% and collections declined by 46.4% to 53.9%. Percentage reductions did not correlate with practice size. The majority of respondents believed that volumes would recover but not entirely (62%-88%) and anticipated a short-term recovery, with a surge likely in the short term due to postponement of elective imaging (52%-64%). About 16% of respondents reported that radiologists in their practices tested positive for COVID-19. More than half (52.3%) reported that availability of personal protective equipment had become an issue or was inadequate. A majority (62.3%) reported that their practices had existing remote reading or teleradiology capabilities in place before the pandemic, and 22.3% developed such capabilities in response to the pandemic.ConclusionsRadiology practices across different settings experienced substantial declines in imaging volumes and collections during the initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in April 2020. Most are actively engaged in both short- and long-term operational adjustments.     

Characteristics of COVID-19 Community Practice Declines in Noninvasive Diagnostic Imaging Professional Work

PurposeThe operational and financial impact of the widespread coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) curtailment of imaging services on radiology practices is unknown. We aimed to characterize recent COVID-19-related community practice noninvasive diagnostic imaging professional work declines.MethodsUsing imaging metadata from nine community radiology practices across the United States between January 2019 and May 2020, we mapped work relative value unit (wRVU)-weighted stand-alone noninvasive diagnostic imaging service codes to both modality and body region. Weekly 2020 versus 2019 wRVU changes were analyzed by modality, body region, and site of service. Practice share χ² testing was performed.ResultsAggregate weekly wRVUs ranged from a high of 120,450 (February 2020) to a low of 55,188 (April 2020). During that −52% wRVU nadir, outpatient declines were greatest (−66%). All practices followed similar aggregate trends in the distribution of wRVUs between each 2020 versus 2019 week (P = .96-.98). As a percentage of total all-practice wRVUs, declines in CT (20,046 of 63,992; 31%) and radiography and fluoroscopy (19,196; 30%) were greatest. By body region, declines in abdomen and pelvis (16,203; 25%) and breast (12,032; 19%) imaging were greatest. Mammography (−17%) and abdominal and pelvic CT (−14%) accounted for the largest shares of total all-practice wRVU reductions. Across modality-region groups, declines were far greatest for mammography (−92%).ConclusionsSubstantial COVID-19-related diagnostic imaging work declines were similar across community practices and disproportionately impacted mammography. Decline patterns could facilitate pandemic second wave planning. Overall implications for practice workflows, practice finances, patient access, and payment policy are manifold.     

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic Shifts Inpatient Imaging Utilization

ObjectiveThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a significant impact on imaging utilization across practice settings. The purpose of this study was to quantify the change in the composition of inpatient imaging volumes for modality types and Current Procedural Terminology–coded groups during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsA retrospective study of inpatient imaging volumes in a large health care system was performed, analyzing weekly imaging volumes by modality types (radiography, CT, MRI, ultrasound, interventional radiology, nuclear medicine) in years 2020 and 2019. The data set was split to compare pre-COVID-19 (weeks 1-9) and post-COVID-19 (weeks 10-16) periods. Further subanalyses compared early post-COVID-19 (weeks 10-13) and late post-COVID-19 (weeks 14-16) periods. Statistical comparisons were performed using χ² and independent-samples t tests.ResultsCompared with 2019, total inpatient imaging volume in 2020 post-COVID-19, early and late post-COVID-19 periods, declined by 13.6% (from 78,902 to 68,168), 16.6% (from 45,221 to 37,732), and 9.6% (from 33,681 to 30,436), respectively. By week 16, inpatient imaging volume rebounded and was only down 4.2% (from 11,003 to 10,546). However, a statistically significant shift (P < .0001) in the 2020 composition mix was observed largely comprised of radiography (74.3%), followed by CT (12.7%), ultrasound (8%), MRI (2.4%), interventional radiology (2.3%), and nuclear medicine (0.4%). Although the vast majority of imaging studies declined, few Current Procedural Terminology–coded groups showed increased trends in imaging volumes in the late post-COVID-19 period, including CT angiography chest, radiography chest, and ultrasound venous duplex.DiscussionDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, we observed a decrease in inpatient imaging volumes accompanied by a shift away from cross-sectional imaging toward radiography. These findings could have significant implications in planning for a potential resurgence.     

The radiology workforce's response to the COVID-19 pandemic in the Middle East,North Africa and India

IntroductionThis study aimed to investigate the response of the radiology workforce to the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on professional practice in India and eight other Middle Eastern and North African countries. It further investigated the levels of fear and anxiety among this workforce during the pandemic.MethodsA quantitative cross-sectional study was conducted using an online survey from 22 May-2 June 2020 among radiology workers employed during the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey collected information related to the following themes: (1) demographic characteristics, (2) the impact of COVID-19 on radiology practice, and (3) fear and (4) anxiety emanating from the global pandemic.ResultsWe received 903 responses. Fifty-eight percent had completed training on infection control required for handling COVID-19 patients. A large proportion (79.5%) of the respondents strongly agreed or agreed that personal protective equipment (PPE) was adequately available at work during the pandemic. The respondents reported experiences of work-related stress (42.9%), high COVID-19 fear score (83.3%) and anxiety (10%) during the study period.ConclusionThere was a perceived workload increase in general x-ray and Computed Tomography imaging procedures because they were the key modalities for the initial and follow-up investigations of COVID-19. However, there was adequate availability of PPE during the study period. Most radiology workers were afraid of being infected with the virus. Fear was predominant among workers younger than 30 years of age and also in temporary staff. Anxiety occurred completely independent of gender, age, experience, country, place of work, and work status.Implications for practiceIt is important to provide training and regular mental health support and evaluations for healthcare professionals, including radiology workers, during similar future pandemics.     

Imaging Utilization During the COVID-19 Pandemic Highlights Socioeconomic Health Disparities

ObjectiveThe devastating impact from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic highlights long-standing socioeconomic health disparities in the United States. The purpose of this study was to evaluate socioeconomic factors related to imaging utilization during the pandemic.MethodsRetrospective review of consecutive imaging examinations was performed from January 1, 2019, to May 31, 2020, across all service locations (inpatient, emergency, outpatient). Patient level data were provided for socioeconomic factors (age, sex, race, insurance status, residential zip code). Residential zip code was used to assign median income level. The weekly total imaging volumes in 2020 and 2019 were plotted from January 1 to May 31 stratified by socioeconomic factors to demonstrate the trends during the pre-COVID-19 (January 1 to February 28) and post-COVID-19 (March 1 to May 31) periods. Independent-samples t tests were used to statistically compare the 2020 and 2019 socioeconomic groups.ResultsCompared with 2019, the 2020 total imaging volume in the post-COVID-19 period revealed statistically significant increased imaging utilization in patients who are aged 60 to 79 years (P = .0025), are male (P < .0001), are non-White (Black, Asian, other, unknown; P < .05), are covered by Medicaid or uninsured (P < .05), and have income below $80,000 (P < .05). However, there was a significant decrease in imaging utilization among patients who are younger (<18 years old; P < .0001), are female (P < .0001), are White (P = .0003), are commercially insured (P < .0001), and have income ≥$80,000 (P < .05).DiscussionDuring the pandemic, there was a significant change in imaging utilization varying by socioeconomic factors, consistent with the known health disparities observed in the prevalence of COVID-19. These findings could have significant implications in directing utilization of resources during the pandemic and subsequent recovery.     

The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the mental health and work morale of radiographers within a conventional X-ray department

IntroductionThere is a plethora of literature that has described the negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of healthcare staff worldwide. Our aim was to investigate the physical and mental demands of mobile x-ray imaging on radiographers during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, within a local NHS Trust.MethodsA total of 16 participants from 1 NHS Trust took part within this study. Both quantitative and qualitative data was obtained through an online survey. Statistical data was obtained via the Trust Radiology Information System (RIS). Data was gathered for the thirteen weeks from 23rd March to 21st June 2020 (the first wave); direct comparison was made to the same period in 2019.ResultsThree key themes emerged from the data. These include mental health challenges/work morale in Radiology, demand of mobile imaging and departmental and Trust-wide mental health support. Results indicate a high demand in mobile imaging which has made a significant difference in the working life of some radiographers.ConclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic has significantly affected the mental health of a proportion of radiographers at this Trust. Results indicate high workload and demand in mobile imaging has made a significant difference to the working life of radiographers, specifically the ones who were relatively newly qualified.Implications for practiceTwo key interventions are proposed from this study. The first one is to provide and promote mental health support within radiology departments. The second is to encourage dual working on mobile x-ray examinations to help manage the emotional and physical burden.     

Identifying Factors Important to Patients for Resuming Elective Imaging During the COVID-19 Pandemic

PurposeTo identify factors important to patients for their return to elective imaging during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.MethodsIn all, 249 patients had elective MRIs postponed from March 23, 2020, to April 24, 2020, because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Of these patients, 99 completed a 22-question survey about living arrangement and health care follow-up, effect of imaging postponement, safety of imaging, and factors important for elective imaging. Mann-Whitney U, Fisher’s exact, χ² tests, and logistic regression analyses were performed. Statistical significance was set to P ≤ .05 with Bonferroni correction applied.ResultsOverall, 68% of patients felt imaging postponement had no impact or a small impact on health, 68% felt it was fairly or extremely safe to obtain imaging, and 53% thought there was no difference in safety between hospital-based and outpatient locations. Patients who already had imaging performed or rescheduled were more likely to feel it was safe to get an MRI (odds ratio [OR] 3.267, P = .028) and that the hospital setting was safe (OR 3.976, P = .004). Staff friendliness was the most important factor related to an imaging center visit (95% fairly or extremely important). Use of masks by staff was the top infection prevention measure (94% fairly or extremely important). Likelihood of rescheduling imaging decreased if a short waiting time was important (OR = 0.107, P = .030).ConclusionAs patients begin to feel that it is safe to obtain imaging examinations during the COVID-19 pandemic, many factors important to their imaging experience can be considered by radiology practices when developing new strategies to conduct elective imaging.     

Magnetic resonance imaging features of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia: The first preliminary case series

Rationale and objectivesThere is a rising onus on understanding the common features of COVID-19 pneumonia on different imaging modalities. In this study, we aimed to review and depict the common MRI features of COVID-19 pneumonia in our laboratory confirmed case series, the first comprehensive reported cohort in the literature.Materials and methodsUpon IRB approval, eight laboratory confirmed COVID-19 patients who presented to our outpatient imaging clinic underwent chest CT and, once various features of COVID-19 pneumonia were identified, a dedicated multisequence chest MRI was performed on the same day with an institutional protocol. Demographic data and the morphology, laterality and location of the lesions were recorded for each case.ResultsFive males and three females with the mean age of 40.63 ± 12.64 years old were present in this case series. Five cases had typical CT features with ground glass opacities and consolidations, readily visible on different MRI sequences. Three cases had indeterminate or atypical features which were also easily seen on MRI. The comprehensive review of MRI features for each case and representative images have been illustrated.ConclusionBecoming familiar with typical findings of COVID-19 pneumonia in MRI is crucial for every radiologist. Although MRI is not the modality of choice for evaluation of pulmonary opacities, it has similar capabilities in detection of COVID-19 pneumonia when compared to chest CT.     

Brachytherapy care during the COVID-19 pandemic: Practice statement from a cancer center in Wuhan,China

PurposeCOVID-19 broke out in late 2019 and rapidly spread around the world and became a pandemic. This highly contagious disease affects routine health care services and patients with cancer who are susceptible to it. Delivering brachytherapy on time is critical for patients with cancer to get better prognosis. The purpose of this study is to present workflow and standard for radiation centers to deliver brachytherapy and avoid cross-infection during the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods and MaterialsThis study combined previous literature and guidelines of precaution with clinical experience in the COVID-19 pandemic.ResultsA workflow covering patients' screening, health care workers’ precaution, training, and other aspects of the whole brachytherapy procedure was established.ConclusionsFrom the reopening of radiation center to mid-May in 2020, there is no hospital infection of COVID-19 in patients or health care workers. This recommendation is effective and helpful to other cancer centers.     

Acute Appendicitis During Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Changes in Clinical Presentation and CT Findings

BackgroundQuarantine and stay-at-home orders are strategies that many countries used during the acute pandemic period of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) to prevent disease dissemination, health system overload, and mortality. However, there are concerns that patients did not seek necessary health care because of these mandates.PurposeTo evaluate the differences in the clinical presentation of acute appendicitis and CT findings related to these cases between the COVID-19 acute pandemic period and nonpandemic period.Materials and MethodsA retrospective observational study was performed to compare the acute pandemic period (March 23, 2020, to May 4, 2020) versus the same period the year before (March 23, 2019, to May 4, 2019). The proportion of appendicitis diagnosed by CT and level of severity of the disease were reviewed in each case. Univariate and bivariate analyses were performed to identify significant differences between the two groups.ResultsA total of 196 abdominal CT scans performed due to suspected acute appendicitis were evaluated: 55 from the acute pandemic period and 141 from the nonpandemic period. The proportion of acute appendicitis diagnosed by abdominal CT was higher in the acute pandemic period versus the nonpandemic period: 45.5% versus 29.8% (P = .038). The severity of the diagnosed appendicitis was higher during the acute pandemic period: 92% versus 57.1% (P = .003).ConclusionDuring the acute COVID-19 pandemic period, fewer patients presented with acute appendicitis to the emergency room, and those who did presented at a more severe stage of the disease.     

Pulmonary embolism severity before and during the COVID-19 pandemic

Objectives:Early in the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, a high frequency of pulmonary embolism was identified. This audit aims to assess the frequency and severity of pulmonary embolism in 2020 compared to 2019.Methods:In this retrospective audit, we compared computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) frequency and pulmonary embolism severity in April and May 2020, compared to 2019. Pulmonary embolism severity was assessed with the Modified Miller score and the presence of right heart strain was assessed. Demographic information and 30-day mortality was identified from electronic health records.Results:In April 2020, there was a 17% reduction in the number of CTPA performed and an increase in the proportion identifying pulmonary embolism (26%, n = 68/265 vs 15%, n = 47/320, p < 0.001), compared to April 2019. Patients with pulmonary embolism in 2020 had more comorbidities (p = 0.026), but similar age and sex compared to 2019. There was no difference in pulmonary embolism severity in 2020 compared to 2019, but there was an increased frequency of right heart strain in May 2020 (29 vs 12%, p = 0.029). Amongst 18 patients with COVID-19 and pulmonary embolism, there was a larger proportion of males and an increased 30 day mortality (28% vs 6%, p = 0.008).Conclusion:During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a reduction in the number of CTPA scans performed and an increase in the frequency of CTPA scans positive for pulmonary embolism. Patients with both COVID-19 and pulmonary embolism had an increased risk of 30-day mortality compared to those without COVID-19.Advances in knowledge:During the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of CTPA performed decreased and the proportion of positive CTPA increased. Patients with both pulmonary embolism and COVID-19 had worse outcomes compared to those with pulmonary embolism alone.     

Wellness Program Implementation in an Academic Radiology Department: Determination of Need,Organizational Buy-in,and Outcomes

ObjectiveTo implement a multifaceted wellness program in an academic radiology department to prevent burnout and to assess initial outcomes with special focus on the challenges related to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.MethodsA wellness program was established to address institutional and personal factors of burnout. The program focused on interventions to improve efficiency of practice, provide personal and career support, and create a culture of wellness. The components of the program were designed with input from radiology faculty, and the program was financially supported by the hospital’s physician organization. A survey was performed 6 months after the initiation of the program to determine radiologist engagement and satisfaction. With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, a new survey was administered to identify needs of faculty and adjust initiatives. This study was exempt from institutional review board approval.ResultsThe majority of radiologists (79%) agreed or strongly agreed that the wellness program provided opportunities to connect with coworkers. All radiologists agreed that the program was helpful and should be continued. During the COVID-19 pandemic, 49% of physicians requested initiatives focused on well-being, emotional health, and mindfulness to support them during the crisis.ConclusionsThe implementation of a faculty wellness program in an academic radiology department addressed institutional and personal factors of burnout, allowed faculty to connect with coworkers, and was found to be helpful by all radiologists. The COVID-19 pandemic shifted needs to well-being and emotional health initiatives. Follow-up data are necessary to assess its effect on burnout reduction.     

COVID-19: Recovery Models for Radiology Departments

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has greatly affected demand for imaging services, with marked reductions in demand for elective imaging and image-guided interventional procedures. To guide radiology planning and recovery from this unprecedented impact, three recovery models were developed to predict imaging volume over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic: (1) a long-term volume model with three scenarios based on prior disease outbreaks and other historical analogues, to aid in long-term planning when the pandemic was just beginning; (2) a short-term volume model based on the supply-demand approach, leveraging increasingly available COVID-19 data points to predict examination volume on a week-to-week basis; and (3) a next-wave model to estimate the impact from future COVID-19 surges. The authors present these models as techniques that can be used at any stage in an unpredictable pandemic timeline.     

Trends in Academic Productivity Among Radiologists During the COVID-19 Pandemic

PurposeThere is a scarcity of literature examining changes in radiologist research productivity during the COVID-19 pandemic. The current study aimed to investigate changes in academic productivity as measured by publication volume before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsThis single-center, retrospective cohort study included the publication data of 216 researchers consisting of associate professors, assistant professors, and professors of radiology. Wilcoxon’s signed-rank test was used to identify changes in publication volume between the 1-year-long defined prepandemic period (publications between May 1, 2019, and April 30, 2020) and COVID-19 pandemic period (May 1, 2020, to April 30, 2021).ResultsThere was a significantly increased mean annual volume of publications in the pandemic period (5.98, SD = 7.28) compared with the prepandemic period (4.98, SD = 5.53) (z = ?2.819, P = .005). Subset analysis demonstrated a similar (17.4%) increase in publication volume for male researchers when comparing the mean annual prepandemic publications (5.10, SD = 5.79) compared with the pandemic period (5.99, SD = 7.60) (z = ?2.369, P = .018). No statistically significant changes were found in similar analyses with the female subset.DiscussionSignificant increases in radiologist publication volume were found during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with the year before. Changes may reflect an overall increase in academic productivity in response to clinical and imaging volume ramp down.