Towards Consensus: Training in Procedural Skills for Diagnostic Radiology Residents-Current Opinions of Residents and Faculty at a Large Academic Center.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The Diagnostic Radiology Milestones Project provides a framework for measuring resident competence in radiologic procedures, but there are limited data available to assist in developing these guidelines. We performed a survey of current radiology residents and faculty at our institution as a first step toward obtaining data for this purpose. The survey addressed attitudes toward procedural standardization and procedures that trainees should be competent by the end of residency. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Current residents and faculty members were surveyed about whether or not there should be standardization of procedural training, in which procedures residents should achieve competency, and the number of times a procedure needs to be performed to achieve competency. RESULTS: Survey data were received from 60 study participants with an overall response rate of 32%. Sixty-five percent of respondents thought that procedural training should be standardized. Standardization of procedural training would include both the list of procedures that trainees should be competent in at the end of residency and the standard minimum number of procedures to achieve competency. Procedures that both residents and faculty agreed are important in which to achieve competency included central line/port procedures; CT-guided abdominal, thoracic, and musculoskeletal procedures; minor fluoroscopic-guided procedures; general fluoroscopy; peripheral line placements; and US-guided abdominal procedures. For most of these categories, most respondents believed that these procedures needed to be performed 6-20 times to achieve competency. CONCLUSION: Both resident and faculty respondents agreed that procedural training should be standardized during residency, and competence in specific procedures should be achieved at the completion of residency. Although this study is limited to a single institution, our data may provide assistance in developing future guidelines for standardizing image-guided procedure training. Future studies could be expanded to create a national consensus regarding the implementation of the Diagnostic Radiology Milestones Project.

Expectations of Medical Student Neuroradiology Education: A Survey of Practicing Neuroradiologists and Neurologists.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate which neuroradiological diseases neuroradiologists and neurologists believe medical students should be exposed to during their neuroradiology rotation. Members of the American Society of Neuroradiology (ASNR) and the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) were surveyed. Respondents were presented 32 diseases with neuroimaging findings and asked which ones medical students should be exposed to during a neuroradiology rotation. Using a 50% response threshold per disease entity, results were tabulated into 3 groups: diagnoses that (1) more than 50% of neuroradiologists and neurologists felt medical students should see radiologically by rotation completion, (2) less than 50% of respondents in both the groups felt were important, and (3) both the groups disagree are important. Both the groups thought medical students should be exposed to imaging of intraparenchymal hemorrhage (ASNR = 80.4% vs AAN = 84.3%; P = 0.346) and subarachnoid hemorrhage (ASNR = 74% vs AAN = 78%; P = 0.394). Both the groups (>50%) thought subdural hematoma, acute ischemic stroke, epidural hematoma, and spinal cord compression are important. Conditions such as spine fractures, nonacute stroke, arteriovenous malformation, and ear-nose-throat pathology showed varied results between both the groups. Varying degrees of similarity and differences exist between the expectations of neuroradiologists and neurologists regarding medical student neuroradiology education, presenting a positive opportunity for greater consensus, dialogue, and joint curriculum formation.