Basic characteristics of radiology groups in the United States: results of a 1991-1992 census

A comprehensive portrait of teleradiology in radiology practices: results from the American College of Radiology's 1999 Survey

OBJECTIVE

This article presents a comprehensive portrait of the characteristics of teleradiology systems of radiology practices as of 1999. Our purposes are to help profile a rapidly evolving area of radiology that has been underexamined to date and to provide a baseline with which future findings can be compared.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 1999, the American College of Radiology surveyed 970 practices by mail. A response rate of 66% was achieved. Responses were weighted to represent all radiology practices in the United States. Data from nine questions specifically designed to profile the use of teleradiology were analyzed using descriptive statistical methods and multivariate regression analyses.

RESULTS

Seventy-one percent of multiradiologist practices had teleradiology systems in place, using them to interpret 5% of their studies. For solo practices, corresponding statistics were 30% and 14%. Ninety-two percent of multiradiologist practices with teleradiology systems used them for preliminary on-call interpretation. Other major uses included consultation with other radiologists (20%) and primary interpretation of studies (18%). Ninety-five percent of multiradiologist practices with teleradiology systems used them to interpret CT, 84% used them for sonography, 69% for nuclear medicine, 47% for MRI, and 43% for conventional radiographs.

CONCLUSION

Teleradiology had already become a fixture in most practices by 1999, though it was used for only a small fraction of image interpretations. Its widespread presence positioned teleradiology to become a key element of radiology practice nationwide.

Types of Procedures Performed by Diagnostic Radiology Practices:Past Patterns and Future Directions

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of our study was to determine the types of imaging procedures performed by diagnostic radiology practices and the patterns and differences related to practice characteristics.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The American College of Radiology (ACR) surveyed 970 practices by mail, using a 65-item questionnaire, in 1999. A response rate of 66% was achieved. Weighting was used to make responses representative of all radiology practices in the United States. Trends were explored by making comparisons with data from a 1991-1992 ACR study.

RESULTS

Among the types of procedures studied, the highest percentage of multiradiologist diagnostic-radiology-only practices performed mammography (95%) and sonography (94%). (General conventional radiography and fluoroscopy were not studied.) The lowest percentage of these practices performed interventional procedures (69%) and MRI (77%). Solo practices showed less diversity in types of procedures performed than did multiradiologist practices and were a good deal less likely to perform each type of procedure except mammography and sonography. Generally, higher percentages of practices in nonmetropolitan cities or towns and rural practices performed various types of procedures than practices in metropolitan areas. Practice size, types of settings served (hospital or nonhospital), and practice type also influenced the number of types of procedures performed by a practice. The fraction of practices performing CT decreased from 91% to 83% between 1991-1992 and 1999. Percentages for other types of procedures were generally stable over time.

CONCLUSION

Certain practice characteristics play a role in determining the types of imaging procedures a diagnostic radiology practice performs. The decline in the percentage of practices providing CT and the failure during the 1990s of percentages for MRI and interventional radiology to increase from a relatively low base is worrisome. Future analyses based on a subsequent ACR survey will provide further insights into trends.

Characteristics of mixed diagnostic radiology-radiation oncology practices

OBJECTIVE

Our objectives were to describe the characteristics of "mixed practices"-that is, practices performing both diagnostic radiology and radiation oncology services-and to compare mixed practices with multiradiologist diagnostic radiology-only practices.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 1999, the American College of Radiology surveyed 970 practices by mail, using a 65-item questionnaire. A response rate of 66% was achieved. Responses were weighted such that they were representative of all the radiology practices in the United States. The estimates cited in this article were primarily drawn from this 1999 survey.

RESULTS

Mixed practices were nearly evenly divided between large (area population, > or = 1 million) and small metropolitan areas (area population, from 50,000 to 1 million). We found that 63% of mixed practices were nonacademic private practices; 27% were academic. Approximately 50% contained 15 or more members. Mixed practices were predominantly owned by members of the practice and predominantly served both hospitals and nonhospital settings. At least 90% of mixed practices performed mammography, imaging-guided breast biopsy, sonography, and nuclear medicine. We found that compared with multiradiologist diagnostic radiology-only practices, mixed practices were larger and were more likely to be academic, to serve both hospital and nonhospital settings, and to perform interventional and nuclear medicine procedures.

CONCLUSION

The characteristics of a mixed practice differ from those of a multiradiologist diagnostic radiology-only practice.

Basic characteristics of radiology practices: results from the American College of Radiology's 1999 survey

OBJECTIVE

The basic characteristics of radiology practices in the United States are described. We defined radiology practices as diagnostic-radiology-only practices, either solo or multiradiologist practices. Findings were compared with those from other data sources.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In May 1999, the American College of Radiology surveyed 970 practices by mail using a 65-item questionnaire. A final response rate of 66% was achieved. Weighting was used to make responses representative of all radiology practices in the United States.

RESULTS

Approximately 4400 radiology practices existed in the country; 39% were located in nonmetropolitan or rural areas. The greatest percentage of practices (85%) was private nonacademic radiology practices. The greatest percentage of practices (43%) served only hospitals. However, solo practices were particularly likely (p < or = 0.01) to serve only nonhospital sites. Of all multiradiologist practices, 87% were completely owned by their members, but approximately two thirds of academic multiradiologist practices had outside owners. Seventy percent of multiradiologist practices interpreted images from outside clinics or groups; these averaged 3.2 outside clinics or groups for which they interpreted images.

CONCLUSION

The basic characteristics of radiology practices in 1999 are described. Good agreement was seen with findings obtained from other data sources.

Radiation oncologists in 2000: demographic, professional, and practice characteristics

PURPOSE

To describe the demographic, professional, and practice characteristics of radiation oncologists, emphasizing comparisons to data from a similar 1995 Survey.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

In spring 2000, we surveyed 603 randomly selected radiation oncologists by mail, using a one-page questionnaire-455 responded. We weighted responses to make answers representative of all radiation oncologists in the United States.

RESULTS

Approximately 45% of post-training, professionally active, radiation oncologists were <45 years old and 22% were women. Forty-two percent of radiation oncologists in training were women. Thirty-three percent of radiation-oncology-only practices were solo practices. The greatest percentage of post-training, professionally active, radiation oncologists were in nonacademic private radiation oncology practices. Fifty-three percent of post-training, professionally active, radiation oncologists reported that their workload was about right. Eighteen percent of individuals 60-64 years old and approximately two-thirds of those > or =65 years old were not working (retired). The full-time equivalency of those aged 55-74 fell by 12 percentage points between 1995 and 2000.

CONCLUSIONS

Most demographic, professional, and practice characteristics remained relatively constant between 1995 and 2000, with the exception of work status patterns. Radiation oncologists reported a more balanced workload than that reported by diagnostic radiologists. The surplus of radiation oncologists, which was predicted in the mid-1990s, was not demonstrated.

Diagnostic radiologists in 2000: basic characteristics, practices, and issues related to the radiologist shortage

OBJECTIVE

We sought to describe radiologists and their practices, emphasizing trends in retirement age, practice size, and perceived workload burden.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In spring 2000, we surveyed 3,027 randomly selected radiologists by mail, of whom 74% responded. We weighted responses to make answers representative of all radiologists and compared findings with a similar 1995 survey.

RESULTS

Thirty percent of radiologists age 65-69 were working full-time; 21% were working part-time. Overall, the full-time equivalency of radiologists age 55-74 was 67.6%, not significantly different from 1995. If current patterns of retirement and production of graduates continue, the workforce will grow at a rate of approximately 2% annually. Fifty-one percent of radiologists said that recognizing that income depends largely on work done, they had "much too much work" or "somewhat too much work"; 5% reported "somewhat too little work" or "much too little work." Six percent of posttraining professionally active radiologists were in solo practice, down from 8% in 1995; 15% were in two-to-four-radiologists groups, down from 17%; and 38% were in groups of 15 or more, up from 30%. Sixteen percent of posttraining professionally active radiologists were women. The percentage was highest (29%) for those younger than age 35 but was lower (22%) among trainees.

CONCLUSION

The findings of excess work are further evidence of a radiologist shortage. However, contrary to surveys of groups that are hiring, we found minimal evidence of earlier retirement. Nonetheless, workload currently is increasing faster than the workforce is likely to grow, so the shortage will probably intensify. The typical number of radiologists in a practice is increasing, but slowly.

Hiring preferences of diagnostic radiology groups: results of a 1994 survey

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

We surveyed diagnostic radiology group preferences and considerations in hiring radiologists and compared these findings with those of a survey performed in 1990. We sought to identify changes in hiring practices that might have occurred because of socioeconomic changes. We also sought to identify features of job candidates that make them more attractive to hiring groups.

METHODS

One hundred surveys were mailed to a stratified random sample of diagnostic radiology groups identified by the American College of Radiology. We solicited information on the importance of various attributes and the level of experience of a candidate, the fellowship training considered most desirable, and the effect of changes in the health care socioeconomic environment. The responses were weighted by group size and geographic location to estimate what results might have been obtained if we had surveyed all groups in the United States.

RESULTS

Seventy-five groups returned the survey. The two most important factors in choosing a candidate were motivation and radiologic knowledge. The fellowships that groups that were hiring considered to be the most desirable were body imaging, neuroradiology, and angiography/interventional radiology. Groups overwhelmingly preferred recent training over long experience.

CONCLUSION

Fellowship training increases a candidate's marketability, but the two factors that hiring groups consider the most important are motivation and radiologic knowledge.