The new radiology workforce: Changing expectations

The zeitgeist of the new radiology workforce can best be described by a Bob Dylan song title: “The Times They Are A-Changin’.” The new generation of physicians, although embracing the same foundations of medical practice as previous generations, places greater emphasis on personal satisfaction than its predecessors. Gone are the days when physicians operated as sole practitioners; today’s workforce member is content to function in the role of “employee” in a trade-off for more lifestyle flexibility. This change has occurred not because of one specific factor but because of a change in the profession of medicine coupled with a combination of factors; familial responsibilities, avocational activities, and personal satisfaction have surfaced as motivating factors in choosing a profession. Today’s workforce has a personal perception of success that may not be fulfilled solely by the contemporary practice of medicine. With the radiologist shortages that are now occurring and anticipated increased demand for staff radiologists, today’s radiology workforce has helped shape the specialty into one that is altering its structure to attract and retain its workforce.     

Unifying the Silos of Subspecialized Radiology: The Essential Role of the General Radiologist

As radiology becomes increasingly subspecialized, conversations focus on whether the general radiologist is trending toward extinction. Current data indicate that the vast majority of graduating radiology residents now seek fellowship training. Practicing entirely within the narrow confines of one’s fellowship subspecialty area, however, is uncommon, with recent data indicating that more than half of all radiologists spend the majority of their work effort as generalists. From the traditional concept of the generalist as the non-fellowship-trained radiologist who interprets everything to the multispecialty-trained radiologist to the emergency radiologist who is a subspecialist but reads across the traditional anatomic divisions, the general radiologist of today and the future is one who remains broadly skilled and equipped to provide a wide spectrum of radiologic services. The successful future of many practices of all types and the specialty as a whole will require ongoing collaborative partnerships that include both general and subspecialized radiologists. This review article highlights various scenarios in which general radiologists provide value to different types of radiology practices.     

Radiologist-Practice Separation: Recent Trends and Characteristics

PurposeTo assess recent trends and characteristics in radiologist-practice separation across the United States.MethodsUsing the Medicare Physician Compare and Medicare Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File data sets, we linked all radiologists to associated group practices annually between 2014 and 2018 and assessed radiologist-practice separation over a variety of physician and group characteristics. Multivariate logistic regression modeling was used to estimate the likelihood of radiologist-practice separation.ResultsOf 25,228 unique radiologists associated with 4,381 unique group practices, 41.1% separated from at least one group practice between 2014 and 2018, and annual separation rates increased 38.4% over time (13.8% from 2014 to 2015 to 19.2% from 2017 to 2018). Radiologist-practice separation rates ranged from 57.4% in Utah to 26.3% in Virginia. Separation rates were 42.8% for general radiologists versus 38.2% for subspecialty radiologists. Among subspecialists, separation rates ranged from 43.0% for breast imagers to 33.5% for cardiothoracic radiologists. Early career status (odds ratio [OR] = 1.286) and late (OR = 1.554) career status were both independent positive predictors of radiologist-practice separation (both P < .001). Larger practice size (OR = 0.795), radiology-only (versus multispecialty) group (OR = 0.468), academic (versus nonacademic) practice (OR = 0.709), and abdominal (OR = 0.820), musculoskeletal (OR = 0.659), and neuroradiology (OR = 0.895) subspecialization were independent negative predictors (all P < .05).ConclusionsWith over 40% of radiologists separating from at least one practice in recent years, the US radiologist workforce is highly and increasingly mobile. Because reasons for separation (eg, resignation, practice acquisition) cannot be assessed using administrative data, further attention is warranted given the manifold financial, operational, and patient care implications.     

番泻叶、聚乙二醇和二甲基硅油联合应用对胶囊内镜检查可见度及检出率的影响

目的探讨番泻叶、聚乙二醇和二甲基硅油联合应用对于胶囊内镜(CE)检查可见度及检出率的影响。方法选取该院2016年6月-2018年9月拟行CE检查的患者126例,采用随机数表法分为对照组(n=62)与观察组(n=64),两组检查前禁食3 d,对照组予以聚乙二醇和二甲基硅油作为肠道准备,观察组在此基础上给予口服番泻叶。比较两组胃排空时间、小肠转运时间、胃和小肠的染色节段长度、绿色条带长度、肠道清洁程度、两组病变检出情况及不良反应发生情况。结果两组患者胃排空时间、小肠转运时间、胃和小肠的染色节段无明显差异(P0.05);观察组全小肠和远端小肠绿色条带长度短于对照组,差异均有统计学意义[(5.53±2.93) vs (6.74±2.76)cm;t=2.39,P=0.019;(3.37±2.04) vs (5.56±2.13)cm;t=5.90,P=0.000];两组近端小肠清洁程度差异无统计学意义(P0.05),观察组远端小肠(89.06%vs59.68%,χ2=14.35,P=0.000)和全小肠(87.50%vs 48.39%,χ2=22.23,P=0.000)清洁率明显高于对照组,差异有统计学意义;观察组病变总检出率明显高于对照组(92.18%vs 72.58%,χ2=8.40,P=0.004);两组不良反应发生率差异无统计学意义(17.74%vs 18.75%,P0.05)。结论添加番泻叶可有效提高聚乙二醇和二甲基硅油对于CE的检查可见度和检出率。     

Impact of a Cost Visibility Tool in the Electronic Medical Record on Antibiotic Prescribing in an Academic Medical Center

Background:

Studies evaluating the impact of passive cost visibility tools on antibiotic prescribing are lacking.

Objective:

The objective of this study was to evaluate whether the implementation of a passive antibiotic cost visibility tool would impact antibiotic prescribing and decrease antibiotic spending.

Methods:

An efficiency and effectiveness initiative (EEI) was implemented in October 2012. To support the EEI, an antibiotic cost visibility tool was created in June 2013 displaying the relative cost of antibiotics. Using an observational study of interrupted time series design, 3 time frames were studied: pre EEI, post EEI, and post cost visibility tool implementation. The primary outcome was antibiotic cost per 1,000 patient days. Secondary outcomes included case mix index (CMI)–adjusted antibiotic cost per 1,000 patient days and utilization of the cost visibility tool.

Results:

Initiation of the EEI was associated with a $4,675 decrease in antibiotic cost per 1,000 patient days (P = .003), and costs continued to decrease in the months following EEI (P = .009). After implementation of the cost visibility tool, costs remained stable (P = .844). Despite CMI increasing over time, adjustment for CMI had no impact on the directionality or statistical significance of the results.

Conclusion:

Our study demonstrated a significant and sustained decrease in antibiotic cost per 1,000 patient days when focused medication cost reduction efforts were implemented, but passive cost visibility tool implementation was not associated with additional cost reduction. Antibiotic cost visibility tools may be of most benefit when prior medication cost reduction efforts are lacking or when an active intervention is incorporated.     

The 2015 ACR Commission on Human Resources Workforce Survey

PurposeThe ACR Commission on Human Resources continues to conduct its annual electronic survey to better understand the present workforce scenario for radiologists.MethodsThe Practice of Radiology Environment Database was used to identify group leads, who were asked to complete an electronic survey developed by the Commission on Human Resources. The survey asked group leaders to report the number of radiologists they currently employ or supervise, the number hired in 2014, and the numbers they plan to hire in 2015 and 2018. The leaders were asked to report the subspecialty area used as the main reason for hiring each physician, as well as the ages and genders of their current workforce.ResultsThirty-two percent of group leaders responded to the survey, corresponding to 12,079 radiologists or 39% of all practicing radiologists. Twenty-one percent of the workforce is female and 79% is male. Ten percent of radiologists older than 65 years are women, while 32% younger than 35 are women. Twelve percent of radiologists work part-time, corresponding to a breakdown of 10% of men and 24% of women working part-time. The current workforce is 13% general radiologists and 87% subspecialists. In 2015, a projected 1,131 to 1,484 jobs will be available for radiologists.ConclusionsJob opportunities for radiologists seem to be increasing compared with 2013 and are relatively similar to 2014. Radiologists continue to subspecialize in greater numbers, but only 39% of radiologists practice more than 50% of the time in their subspecialties.     

The Patient Experience in Radiology: Observations From Over 3,500 Patient Feedback Reports in a Single Institution

PurposeTo identify factors associated with the patient experience in radiology based on patient feedback reports from a single institution.MethodsIn a departmental patient experience committee initiative, all imaging outpatients are provided names and roles of all departmental employees with whom they interact, along with contact information for providing feedback after their appointment. All resulting feedback was recorded in a web-based database. A total of 3,675 patient comments over a 3-year period were assessed in terms of major themes. Roles of employees recognized within the patient comments were also assessed.ResultsPatient feedback comments most commonly related to professional staff behavior (74.5%) and wait times (11.9%), and less commonly related to a spectrum of other issues (comfort during the exam, quality of the facilities, access to information regarding the exam, patient privacy, medical records, the radiology report, billing). The most common attributes relating to staff behavior involved patients’ perceptions of staff caring, professionalism, pleasantness, helpfulness, and efficiency. Employees most commonly recognized by the comments were the technologist (50.2%) and receptionist (31.6%) and much less often the radiologist (2.2%). No radiologist was in the top 10% of employees in terms of the number of comments received.ConclusionPatients' comments regarding their experiences in undergoing radiologic imaging were largely influenced by staff behavior and communication (particularly relating to technologists and receptionists), as well as wait times, with radiologists having a far lesser immediate impact. Radiologists are encouraged to engage in activities that promote direct visibility to their patients and thereby combat risks of the perceived “invisible” radiologist.     

13C-NMR relaxation in glycogen

This study is the first report on the multiexponential T₂ relaxation of the ¹³C-1 carbon of glycogen. In contrast to T₁ relaxation, which does not display observable multiexponential decay behavior, T₂ relaxation is described by a continuous distribution of T₂ times. Changes in molecular weight and sample viscosity, which affect the overall mobility of the glycogen particle have little influence on T₁ and T₂ relaxation times. This is in contradiction with earlier results that T₂ is dominated by the overall motion of the glycogen particles [L.-H. Zang Biochemistry 29, 6815–6820 (1990)]. T₁ depends strongly on the external field B_o and is almost temperature independent in the range 23–37°C whereas T₂ is field independent and varies appreciably with temperature. The experimental T₁ and T₂ relaxation data are shown to be consistent with existing theoretical models for relaxation, suitably modified to include a distribution of correlation times for the internal motions. The presence of fast decaying components (short T₂) in the FID implies broad line components in the frequency spectrum and the corresponding need to appropriately set the integration limits for the quantification of the glycogen peak.