Addressing overutilization in medical imaging.

The growth in medical imaging over the past 2 decades has yielded unarguable benefits to patients in terms of longer lives of higher quality. This growth reflects new technologies and applications, including high-tech services such as multisection computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, and positron emission tomography (PET). Some part of the growth, however, can be attributed to the overutilization of imaging services. This report examines the causes of the overutilization of imaging and identifies ways of addressing the causes so that overutilization can be reduced. In August 2009, the American Board of Radiology Foundation hosted a 2-day summit to discuss the causes and effects of the overutilization of imaging. More than 60 organizations were represented at the meeting, including health care accreditation and certification entities, foundations, government agencies, hospital and health systems, insurers, medical societies, health care quality consortia, and standards and regulatory agencies. Key forces influencing overutilization were identified. These include the payment mechanisms and financial incentives in the U.S. health care system; the practice behavior of referring physicians; self-referral, including referral for additional radiologic examinations; defensive medicine; missed educational opportunities when inappropriate procedures are requested; patient expectations; and duplicate imaging studies. Summit participants suggested several areas for improvement to reduce overutilization, including a national collaborative effort to develop evidence-based appropriateness criteria for imaging; greater use of practice guidelines in requesting and conducting imaging studies; decision support at point of care; education of referring physicians, patients, and the public; accreditation of imaging facilities; management of self-referral and defensive medicine; and payment reform.

Update on the diagnostic radiology employment market: findings through 2007-2008.

PURPOSE: To describe the employment market for diagnostic radiologists in 2007-2008, with attention to differences among subspecialties. METHODS: The authors conducted the most recent in a series of annual surveys of vacancies in academic departments and obtained data from the placement service of the ACR (its Professional Bureau) during its operation at the annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America. The authors also obtained survey data on how radiologists' actual workloads compared with what they desired. RESULTS: The ratio of job listings to job seekers at the placement service, which serves both community and academic positions, fell to 0.60 for 2008, compared with 1.1 to 1.2 for 2003 to 2006 and 0.22 to 3.8 in the preceding decade. In 2007, workload averaged 3% less than desired, unlike a close match in 2003. Vacancies per academic department have been growing slightly. Data on academic vacancies indicated that interventional, pediatric, and particularly breast imaging were the fields with the most intense shortages. General radiology and (marginally) neuroradiology were at the opposite end of the spectrum. At the placement service, there was a particularly high ratio of job listings to job seekers for interventional radiology and a particularly low ratio for nuclear medicine/radiology. CONCLUSIONS: The overall job market remains very much intermediate between the highs and lows that have occurred since 1990, but finding highly desirable jobs is likely to be somewhat more difficult, and filling vacancies somewhat easier, in 2008 than in the past few years. There was a strong indication of a 3% surplus of radiologists in 2007. Interventional radiology, pediatric radiology, and particularly breast imaging are the subspecialties in which positions are most difficult to fill; neuroradiology, general radiology, and nuclear radiology may lie at the opposite end of the spectrum.

Update on the diagnostic radiology employment market: findings through 2006-2007.

PURPOSE: To describe the employment market for diagnostic radiologists in 2006-2007, with attention to differences among subspecialties. METHODS: The authors conducted the most recent in a series of annual surveys of vacancies in academic departments and obtained data from the placement service of the American College of Radiology (ACR), its Professional Bureau, during its operation at the annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America. The two data series were correlated. The percentage of academic vacancies in each subspecialty was compared with the percentage of academic radiologists in that subspecialty. RESULTS: Job listings per job seeker at the placement service, which serves both community and academic positions, were 0.72 for 2007 compared with approximately 1.1 to 1.2 for 2003 to 2006 and variation from 0.25 to 3.8 in the preceding decade. The correlation of the two data series was 0.84 (P = .08) for the 5 years for which both are available. Particularly high ratios of academic vacancies to academic radiologists were found for interventional radiology and breast imaging; particularly low ratios were found for neuroradiology and nuclear radiology. CONCLUSIONS: The job market remains very much intermediate between the highs and lows that have occurred since 1990, but finding highly desirable jobs is likely to be somewhat more difficult, and filling vacancies somewhat easier, in 2007 than in the past few years. Interventional radiology and breast imaging are the subspecialties in which academic positions are most difficult to fill; neuroradiology and nuclear radiology seem to be at the opposite end of the spectrum. The same differences across subspecialties are probably found in community practice, given the strong correlation of the two data series.

Update on the diagnostic radiology employment market: findings through 2005.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to analyze and summarize the latest data describing the diagnostic radiologist employment market. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three sources of data--vacancies in academic radiology departments as of July 1, 2005; the ratio of job listings to job seekers at a major placement service; and the number of positions advertised in the American Journal of Roentgenology and Radiology-are presented and compared with previous data. RESULTS: Vacancies in academic departments averaged 4.5 in 2005, an increase of 16% from 2004 but a decrease of 16% from the 2001 peak. Vacancies increased from 2004 in all specialties except nuclear medicine and "other," and vacancies decreased from 2001 in all specialties except pediatric radiology and purely research positions. Job listings per job seeker increased 8% from 2004 but remain far below peak levels. The total number of positions advertised decreased by 6% from 2004, reaching the lowest level since 1998. In 2005, 42% of the total advertised jobs were academic, as compared with 45% in 2004. Proportional decreases were seen between 2004 and 2005 in total advertisements per region except the Northwest and California. The largest proportional increases in subspecialties occurred in general radiology, abdominal imaging, and "other." CONCLUSION: Data from the American College of Radiology Professional Bureau and a survey of academic radiology departments show an increased demand for diagnostic radiologists in 2005, whereas data from the help wanted index show a decrease. In addition, the regional distribution of advertisements and the proportion of advertisements for certain specialties have shown some shifting in 2005. We believe the job market remains strong, with regional and specialty shifting.

Update on the diagnostic radiologist employment market: findings through 2004.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this article is to summarize the latest information concerning the diagnostic radiologist employment market. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three sources of data are presented and compared with previous data: vacancies in academic radiology departments as of July; the ratio of job listings to job seekers at a major placement service; and the number of positions advertised in Radiology and the American Journal of Roentgenology. RESULTS: Vacancies in academic radiology departments averaged 3.9 in 2004, down 29%, and decreased for all subspecialties as compared with 2001, but the number of vacancies remained very similar to that for 2003. Job listings per job seeker were 1.1 in 2004, stable over the past 2 years but at the lowest level since 1997. The overall number of positions advertised declined by 14% in 2003 compared with 2002 and by an additional 17% in 2004, reaching the lowest level since 1998. In 2004, 45.3% of positions advertised were academic. Comparing 2003-2004 with 2001-2002, all geographic regions exhibited absolute declines in advertisements except the Northeast, which showed a 1.5% increase. Absolute increases occurred for musculoskeletal and emergency radiology positions. Statistically significant proportional decreases occurred for general radiology, vascular/interventional radiology, and pediatric radiology. CONCLUSION: Three separate data sources confirm a substantial and broad-based multiyear decline in the strength of the demand for diagnostic radiologists, with some shifting in relative demand for subspecialties. It is not clear if the decrease continued in 2004 or if 2004 demand was similar to that of 2003. Data are relative and do not indicate the employment market is weak in absolute terms.

Update on the diagnostic radiologist shortage.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to present the latest information available on the shortage of diagnostic radiologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four sources of information are available, and we present their data: first, the number of jobs for diagnostic radiologists advertised in Radiology and the American Journal of Roentgenology; second, vacancies in academic radiology departments as of July 1, 2003, ascertained by a survey of these departments; third, the ratio of job listings to job seekers at a major professional placement service, the Professional Bureau of the American College of Radiology (ACR); and fourth, diagnostic radiologists' self-reported workload burden, from the ACR's 2003 Survey of Diagnostic Radiologists. RESULTS: Jobs advertised in September-November 2003 (latest data available) were 28% fewer than in the same months of 2002. Vacancies per department averaged 3.9 in 2003, compared with 5.4 in 2001 and 5.1 in 2002. Listings per seeker were 1.4 in 2002 (latest data available) compared with 3.0 or more in 1999 and 2000. Responses to a question directly tying changes in workload to changes in income indicated that reported desires for workload reduction and workload increase were approximately equal. CONCLUSION: All four information sources have important limitations, but all indicate that the shortage has considerably eased. We plan to study the causes of this easing and continue to monitor the situation.

The National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering: history, status, and potential impact.

This paper describes the history, current status, and objectives and potential impact of the new National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB). Three of the authors (Hendee, Chien, and Maynard) have been involved over several years in the effort to raise the identity of biomedical imaging and bioengineering at the National Institutes of Health. The fourth author (Dean) is the Acting Director of the newly formed NIBIB. These individuals have an extensive collective knowledge of the events that led to formation of the NIBIB, and are intimately involved in shaping its objectives and implementation strategy. This special report provides a historical record of activities leading to establishment of the NIBIB, and an accounting of present and potential advances in biomedical engineering and imaging that will be facilitated and enhanced by NIBIB. The National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering represents a "coming of age" of biomedical engineering and imaging, and offers great potential to expand the research frontiers of these disciplines to unparalleled heights.

The National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering: history, status, and potential impact.

In December 2000, President Clinton signed legislation establishing the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB). This action was the result of a multidecade effort of the biomedical imaging and engineering communities to gain increased recognition for biomedical imaging and engineering research within the National Institutes of Health and to enhance the impact of these disciplines on the health and well-being of people worldwide. Beginning in January 2001, several activities were initiated to form NIBIB into a real asset for researchers in biomedical imaging and engineering. These activities reflect a recognition that research in biomedical imaging and bioengineering has the potential of positively influencing research in many other biomedical disciplines, as well as directly affecting the welfare of people everywhere. This potential impact is discussed in this report, together with the history and present status of the formation of NIBIB.