Percentage Of Radiologists Research Articles

Role of Ergonomic Improvements in Decreasing Repetitive Stress Injuries and Promoting Well-Being in a Radiology Department

To determine if ergonomic improvements in a radiology department can decrease repetitive stress injuries (RSIs), advance ergonomics knowledge, and improve well-being. Radiologists in an academic institution were surveyed regarding physician wellness, workstations, RSIs, and ergonomics knowledge before and after interventions over 1 year. Interventions included committee formation, education, wrist pads and wireless mice, broken table and chair replacement, and cord organization. Mann-Whitney U test was used for analysis. Survey response was 40% preinterventions (59/147), and 42% (66/157) postinterventions. Preinterventions, of radiologists with RSI history, 17/40 (42%) reported the RSI caused symptoms which can lead to burnout, and 15/40 (37%) responded their RSI made them think about leaving their job. Twenty-three of 59 (39%) radiologists had an active RSI preinterventions. Postinterventions, 9/25 (36%) RSI resolved, 13/25 (52%) RSI improved, and 3/25 (12%) RSI did not improve. RSI improvements were attributed to ergonomic interventions in 19/25 (76%) and therapy in 2/25 (8%). Radiologists who thought their workstation was designed with well-being in mind increased from 9/59 (15%) to 52/64 (81%). The percentage of radiologists knowing little or nothing about ergonomics decreased from 15/59 (25%) to 5/64 (8%). After ergonomics interventions, more radiologists thought the administration cared about safety and ergonomics, equipment was distributed fairly, and radiologists had the ability to ask for equipment (p < .01). Fifty-three of 64 (83%) of radiologists after interventions said improving workstation ergonomic design contributed to well-being. Ergonomic improvements in radiology can decrease RSIs, advance ergonomics knowledge, and improve well-being.

Perception of radiology reporting efficacy by neurologists in general and university hospitals

To investigate how neurologists perceive the value of the radiology report and to analyse the relation with the neurologists own expertise in radiology and the level of subspecialisation of radiologists. A web-based survey was distributed to neurologists. The level of subspecialisation was assessed by the percentage of fellowship-trained radiologists and the percentage of radiologists that were members of the Dutch Society of Neuroradiology. Most neurologists interpretall computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies themselves, and their self-confidence in making correct interpretations is high. Residents gave higher scores than neurologists for "Radiologist report answers the question" (p=0.039) and for "Radiologist reports give helpful advice" (p=0.001). Neurologists from university hospitals stated more frequently that the report answered their questions than neurologists from general hospitals (p=0.008). The general appreciation for radiology reports was higher for neurologists from university hospitals than from general hospitals (8.2 versus 7.2; p=0.003). Radiologists at university hospitals have a higher level of subspecialisation than those at general hospitals. Subspecialisation of radiologists leads to higher quality of radiology reporting as perceived by neurologists. Because of their expertise in radiology, neurologists are valuable sources of feedback for radiologists. Paying attention to the clinical questions and giving advice tailored to the needs of the referring physicians are opportunities to improve radiology reporting.

The U.S. Radiologist Workforce: An Analysis of Temporal and Geographic Variation by Using Large National Datasets

To determine recent trends related to temporal as well as national and statewide geographic variation in the U.S. radiologist and radiology resident workforce. This retrospective HIPAA-compliant study was exempted from the internal review board. Federal Area Health Resources Files and Medicare 5% research identifiable files were used to compute parameters related to the radiologist workforce. Geographic variation and annual temporal trends were analyzed. Pearson and Spearman correlations were assessed. Nationally, the number of radiology trainees increased 84.2% from a nadir in 1997 (3080 trainees) to 2011 (5674 trainees) and showed high state-to-state variation (range, 0-678 trainees in 2011). However, total radiologists nationally increased 39.2% from 1995 (27 906 radiologists) to 2011 (38 875 radiologists), and radiologists per 100 000 population nationally increased by 7.5% from 1995 (10.62%) to 2011 (11.42%), while showing high state-to-state variation (highest-to-lowest state ratio of 4.3). Radiologists' share of the overall physician workforce declined nationally by 8.8% from 1995 (4.0%) to 2011 (3.7%), with moderate state-to-state variation (highest-to-lowest state ratio of 1.7). Radiology trainee numbers exhibited weak-to-moderate positive state-by-state correlation with radiologists per 100 000 population (r = 0.292-0.532), but moderate-to-strong inverse correlation with the percentage of radiologists in rural practice (r = -0.464 to -0.635). Although the number of radiology trainees dramatically increased, radiologists per 100 000 population increased only slightly, and radiologists' share of the overall physician workforce declined. State-to-state variations in radiologist and radiology resident workforces are high, which suggests a potential role for geographic redistribution rather than changes in the overall workforce size.

JOURNAL CLUB: Voice Recognition Dictation: Analysis of Report Volume and Use of the Send-to-Editor Function

The purpose of this study was to evaluate use of the send-to-editor function of a radiology voice recognition dictation system and compare study volumes of radiologists who self-edit with those of radiologists who send reports to the editor. Use of voice recognition shortcuts was also evaluated. Voice recognition dictation systems were installed in a six-hospital system, including an 800-bed tertiary care center and five community hospitals, in 2002. This became the only means of radiologist dictation in July 2005. Report volumes, use of the send-to-editor function, and use of shortcuts were tracked from October 2005 through October 2008. A subspecialty private radiology group, ranging from 37 radiologists in July 2005 to 50 radiologists in October 2008, interpreted the imaging studies. Radiologists had no financial incentives to self-edit. The percentage of radiologists using the send-to-editor function remained relatively constant at 46%, resulting in 21% of total reports sent to the editor. Radiologists who used the send-to-editor function dictated approximately 41% more reports than those who self-edited. The volume of reports generated by general radiologists reading large volumes of computed radiography cases and sending to the editor was greater than that of radiologists who self-edited (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between radiologists who self-edited and those who sent to the editor with respect to number of shortcuts used. Radiologists reading large volumes of computed radiography cases and using the send-to-editor function generated significantly more reports than radiologists who did not, suggesting that the send-to-editor function may be useful for improving productivity among radiologists reading large volumes of computed radiography cases.

Feasibility and Satisfaction with a Tailored Web-based Audit Intervention for Recalibrating Radiologists’ Thresholds for Conducting Additional Work-up

To examine the feasibility of and satisfaction with a tailored web-based intervention designed to decrease radiologists' recommendation of inappropriate additional work-up after a screening mammogram. We developed a web-based educational intervention designed to reduce inappropriate recall. Radiologists were randomly assigned to participate in an early intervention group or a late (control) intervention group, the latter of which served as a control for a 9-month follow-up period, after which they were invited to participate in the intervention. Intervention content was derived from our prior research and included three modules: 1) an introduction to audit statistics for mammography performance; 2) a review of data showing radiologists' inflated perceptions of medical malpractice risks related to breast imaging, and 3) a review of data on breast cancer risk among women seen in their practices. Embedded within the intervention were individualized audit data for each participating radiologists obtained from the national Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Seventy-four radiologists (37.8%; 74/196) consented to the intervention, which was completed by 67.5% (27/40) of those randomized to the early intervention group and 41.2% (14/34) of those randomized to the late (control) group. Thus, a total of 41 (55%) completed the intervention. On average, three log-ins were used to complete the program (range 1-14), which took approximately 1 hour. Ninety-five percent found the program moderately to very helpful in understanding how to calculate basic performance measures. Ninety-three percent found viewing their own performance measures moderately to very helpful, and 83% reported it being moderately to very important to learn that the breast cancer risk in their screening population program was lower than perceived. The percentage of radiologists who reported that the risk of medical malpractice influences their recall rates dropped from 36.3% preintervention to 17.8% after intervention with a similar drop in perceived influence of malpractice risk on their recommendations for breast biopsy (36.4 to 17.3%). More than 75% of radiologists answered the postintervention knowledge questions correctly, and the percent of time spent in breast imaging did not appear to influence responses. The majority (>92%) of participants correctly responded that the target recall rate in the United States is 9%. The mean self-reported recall rates were 13.0 for radiologists spending <40% time in breast imaging and 14.9% for those spending >40% time spent in breast imaging, which was highly correlated with their actual recall rates (0.991; P < .001). Radiologists who begin an internet-based tailored intervention designed to help reduce unnecessary recall will likely complete it, although only 55% who consented to the study actually undertook the intervention. Participants found the program useful in helping them understand why their recall rates may be elevated.