Does medical school performance predict radiology resident performance?

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The authors performed this study to examine the relationship, if any, of a large number of measures of medical school performance with radiology residency performance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Applications of 77 radiology residents enrolled from 1991 to 2000 were reviewed. Medical school grades, dean's letter summary statements, letters of recommendation, selection to Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA), and National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) and U.S. Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 scores were recorded. Student t tests, analysis of variance, and correlation coefficients were used to examine the relationship between these measures of medical school performance and subsequent performance during radiology residency as determined by rotation evaluations, retrospective faculty recall scores, and American College of Radiology (ACR) and American Board of Radiology (ABR) examination scores. Resident performance was also correlated with prestige of the medical school attended. RESULTS: Preclinical grades of Honors or A; clinical grades of Honors or A in medicine, surgery, and pediatrics; and high NBME/USMLE scores strongly predicted success on the ABR written clinical examination but did not predict rotation performance. Most other measures of medical school performance, including outstanding Dean's letters and letters of recommendation, AOA selection during the senior year, and high medical school prestige did not predict high examination scores or superior rotation performance during residency. CONCLUSION: Success on the ABR examination can be predicted by medical school success in preclinical courses, some clinical courses, and USMLE examination scores. Dean's letters, letters of recommendation, AOA selection during the senior year, and medical school prestige do not appear to predict future resident performance as reliably.     

Medical student radiology training: what are the objectives for contemporary medical practice?

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The authors attempt to provide a set of objectives for medical student training in radiology for contemporary medical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire containing a list of educational objectives was sent to 32 radiologists in charge of medical student training in radiology at accredited residency programs in Australia and New Zealand. The importance of including each preselected objective in the curriculum was measured by respondents' agreement or disagreement on a scale of 1-6. Opportunity also was given to respondents to suggest objectives other than those presented on the questionnaire. RESULTS: Twenty of the 32 questionnaires were returned, and a set of educational objectives was established based on the responses. The objectives were ranked in importance according to the mean score assigned to each objective by the respondents. CONCLUSION: This new set of educational objectives for medical student radiology training reflects recent changes in radiologic and medical practice and points to potential future developments.     

Controversies in emergency radiology: acute appendicitis in children—the case for CT

Acute appendicitis is the most common condition requiring surgical intervention in childhood. The clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis is often not straightforward and can be challenging. Approximately one-third of children with the condition have atypical clinical findings and are initially managed nonoperatively. There is currently great variability in the utilization of imaging for the assessment of suspected acute appendicitis in children. The principal imaging modalities utilized are graded-compression sonography and CT. Sonography has important diagnostic limitations that are addressed by CT. The principal advantages of CT include its operator independency, with resultant higher diagnostic accuracy, enhanced delineation of disease extent in perforated appendicitis, and improved patient outcomes including decreased negative laparotomy and perforation rates.     

Simulators in catheter-based interventional radiology: training or computer games?

Training in interventional radiology (IR) relies on a traditional apprenticeship; to protect patients, expert supervision is mandatory until knowledge, attitudes and practical skills have been certified as satisfactory. However, the current quality of IR training is threatened by reduced time for trainees to learn, as well as a loss of basic diagnostic, training cases to non-invasive imaging. At the same time, IR techniques are becoming a focus of interest to a range of other clinical specialities. To address this training shortfall there is a need to develop novel training alternatives such as simulator models. Few simulator models in any medical field have been successfully validated to show improved clinical skills in treating patients. To date no endovascular simulator has met this standard. A good simulator must be based around key performance measures (metrics) derived from careful analysis of the procedure to be replicated. Metrics can be determined by trained psychologists from a direct analysis of the content of the job or task to be tested. The identification of these critical measures of performance is a complex process which must be tailored to a training curriculum to be effective. Simulators based on flawed metrics will invariably lead to unsatisfactory assessment. It follows that simulator development must involve the statutory licensing authorities. Equally it is essential that we do not assume that training on a particular simulator will correlate with the ability to perform the task in the real world. This "transfer of training" must be rigorously proven by validation studies.     

Female medical student impression of interventional radiology: what can we do to improve this?

PURPOSEThe number of female medical students has increased significantly in the last decade due to increased gender diversity. However, the number of female doctors going into interventional radiology (IR) does not reflect this trend on an international scale.METHODSA standardized set of questions was created looking into medical students’ demographics, awareness of IR, their general opinion, and whether they would consider IR as a potential career path. One-hundred female medical students from the United Kingdom, Germany, Poland, Spain, and New Zealand were approached either directly or via an online survey platform. The students ranged from first to final year study of Medicine and were between 18 and 30 years of age.RESULTSThe majority of medical students (68%) were unaware of what IR is and 98% denied having teaching about IR in their university. Influential factors to choosing IR were more exposure to IR in medical school (15%), more options to allow family life (15%), direct training pathway to IR rather than via diagnostic radiology (13%), options of private practice (13%), and understanding more about radiation protection during pregnancy (12%).CONCLUSIONA lack of awareness about what IR is and misconceptions, particularly regarding radiation exposure during pregnancy, play an important role in discouraging entry into IR. Additionally, some of the concerns raised were directed at IR training pathway. Female IR consultants should also take leadership initiative to act as role models. More lectures and direct clinical exposure are paramount to their understanding of IR.

Over the past decades, the number of female medical students has gradually increased equalizing the gender gap. The Royal College of Physicians suggest that more than 60% of new medical students in 2009 were female (1). This was increased by ten-fold in comparison to the late 20th century when medicine was a male dominated career (1). However, the number of female doctors going into interventional radiology (IR) training schemes or female IR consultants does not reflect this trend on an international scale. When compared with other specialties such as general surgery and vascular surgery, entrance of women into IR was substantially lower in proportion (2, 3). Even though female consultant radiologists make 35% of the IR workforce in the UK, it was estimated that only 10% of interventional radiology consultants were female (4, 5).Many factors have been perceived to contribute to this discrepancy. These include radiation exposure concerns (particularly those relating to pregnancy), the frequency of being on call, the lack of female role models, and an overwhelmingly male dominant culture in IR (3, 5). Methods to attract females into IR include early exposure to the specialty, preferably at the medical student stage to increase interest and address any misconceptions of the perceived work life imbalance and radiation exposure (5). The aim of our study was to evaluate and understand female medical students’ perception of the obstacles preventing them from entering this career path.     

'Appropriate' medical treatment: what's in a word?

Following the amendments in the 2007 Act, there were several revisions made focusing largely on community treatment orders and deprivation of liberty of persons lacking capacity. One of the amendments included a requirement that 'appropriate treatment' be 'available' for compulsion to be imposed in a variety of contexts, most notably admission for treatment under section 3. The definition of appropriate medical treatment within the Act appears largely circular, and therefore of little assistance. The Code of Practice provides some guidance but does little to add to the statutory language. In terms of jurisprudence, there are three reported cases concerning the provision. These cases are analysed and their significance is discussed in an attempt to formulate a clearer definition for appropriate medical treatment.     

Evidence-based radiology: why and how?

Purpose

To provide an overview of evidence-based medicine (EBM) in relation to radiology and to define a policy for adoption of this principle in the European radiological community.

Results

Starting from Sackett’s definition of EBM we illustrate the top-down and bottom-up approaches to EBM as well as EBM’s limitations. Delayed diffusion and peculiar features of evidence-based radiology (EBR) are defined with emphasis on the need to shift from the demonstration of the increasing ability to see more and better, to the demonstration of a significant change in treatment planning or, at best, of a significant gain in patient outcome. The “as low as reasonably achievable” (ALARA) principle is thought as a dimension of EBR while EBR is proposed as part of the core curriculum of radiology residency. Moreover, we describe the process of health technology assessment in radiology with reference to the six-level scale of hierarchy of studies on diagnostic tests, the main sources of bias in studies on diagnostic performance, and levels of evidence and degrees of recommendations according to the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (Oxford, UK) as well as the approach proposed by the GRADE working group. Problems and opportunities offered by evidence-based guidelines in radiology are considered. Finally, we suggest nine points to be actioned by the ESR in order to promote EBR.

Conclusion

Radiology will benefit greatly from the improvement in practice that will result from adopting this more rigorous approach to all aspects of our work.