Procedural Utilization and Productivity of Advanced Practice Providers in Private and Academic Interventional Radiology

Abstract

PurposeComparative data on Advanced Practice Providers (APPs) in interventional radiology (IR) is helpful to understand APP utilization in different practice settings. Materials and MethodsA 60-question survey was distributed to 3159 IRs on the Society of Interventional Radiologists Doctor Finder, with 357 responses (11.3% response rate). Respondents represented 258 practices, 100 (39%) academic interventional radiology (AIR), and 158 (61%) private practice interventional radiology (PPIR), in 40 states. ResultsAPPs generated on average 2442 ± 1824 work Relative Value Units/APP group/year (n = 42), with no significant differences between practice models (p = .31). Most APPs did not work weekends (74%, n = 189) or take overnight call (90%, n = 190). The most reported procedures by APPs included paracentesis/thoracentesis (93%), venous access peripherally inserted central catheter placement (63%), and fluoroscopy-guided lumbar puncture (57%). AIR APPs were more likely to perform venous tunneled catheter placement (p = .003) and venous access port placement (p = .003), whereas PPIR APPs were more likely to perform joint injections (p < .001) ConclusionSelf-reported data from PPIR and AIR groups shows that APPs perform a myriad procedure with variation between practice models.