Search

Purpose: Increasing volumes and productivity expectations, along with practice type consolidation, may be impacting trainees' roles in the work effort of radiologists involved in education. We assessed temporal shifts in trainee participation in radiologists' workload nationally., Methods: All US radiologists interpreting noninvasive diagnostic imaging for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries were identified from annual 5% Research Identifiable Files from 2008 to 2020 (n = 35,595). Teaching radiologists were defined as those billing services using Medicare's GC modifier, indicating trainee supervision. Billed work relative value units were used to determine the percentage of teaching radiologists' total workload with trainee participation. Mean trainee participation in workload was calculated for teaching radiologists overall and stratified by radiologist and practice characteristics determined using National Downloadable Files., Results: The percentage of radiologists involved in teaching increased from 13.6% (2008) to 20.4% (2020). Among teaching radiologists, mean total workload increased 7% from 2008 to 2019 and decreased in 2020 to 2% below 2008's level; mean teaching workload decreased 19% from 2008 to 2019 and decreased in 2020 to 31% below 2008's level. Mean trainee participation in teaching radiologists' total workload decreased from 35.3% (2008) to 26.3% (2019) and 24.5% (2020). Teaching radiologists showed decreased mean trainee participation when stratified by gender, experience, subspecialty, geography, practice type, and practice size., Conclusions: The percentage of US radiologists involved in resident teaching has increased, likely reflecting academic practice expansion and academic-community practice consolidation. However, a declining percentage of teaching radiologists' total workload involves trainees; this dispersion effect could have implications for education quality., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To build the Neiman Imaging Comorbidity Index (NICI), based on variables available in claims datasets, which provides good discrimination of an individual's chance of receiving advanced imaging (CT, MR, PET), and thus, utility as a control variable in research., Methods: This retrospective study used national commercial claims data from Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart database from the period January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2019. Individuals with continuous enrollment during this 2-year study period were included. Lasso (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator) regression was used to predict the chance of receiving advanced imaging in 2019 based on the presence of comorbidities in 2018. A numerical index was created in a development cohort (70% of the total dataset) using weights assigned to each comorbidity, based on regression β coefficients. Internal validation of assigned scores was performed in the remaining 30% of claims, with comparison to the commonly used Charlson Comorbidity Index., Results: The final sample (development and validation cohorts) included 10,532,734 beneficiaries, of whom 2,116,348 (20.1%) received advanced imaging. After model development, the NICI included nine comorbidities. In the internal validation set, the NICI achieved good discrimination of receipt of advanced imaging with a C statistic of 0.709 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.708-0.709), which predicted advanced imaging better than the CCI (C 0.692, 95% CI 0.691-0.692). Controlling for age and sex yielded better discrimination (C 0.748, 95% CI 0.748-0.749)., Discussion: The NICI is an easily calculated measure of comorbidity burden that can be used to adjust for patients' chances of receiving advanced imaging. Future work should explore external validation of the NICI., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: We assessed racial and ethnic disparities in the use of prostate biopsy or MRI following an elevated PSA result., Methods: We retrospectively evaluated insurance claims from Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart database from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2017. This was a large commercially insured cohort from across the United States. We included all male enrollees over 40 years old receiving an elevated PSA result with no prior prostate biopsy or MRI and no confirmed urinary tract infection within 6 weeks of PSA test., Results: A total of 765,409 participants met inclusion criteria with 43,711 (5.71%) receiving a PSA result above 4 ng/mL. Of these, 7,399 received either a prostate biopsy or MRI within 180 days. Men between ages 40-54 (29.48%) were most likely to receive prostate biopsy or MRI after an elevated PSA, followed by those between 55-64 (24.91%), 65-74 (18.56%), 75-84 (6.33%), and above 85 (3.62%). Compared to White patients, Black patients were more likely to receive either a prostate biopsy or MRI (OR: 1.16, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.32) following an elevated PSA level, while Asian (OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.54, 0.96) and Hispanic (OR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.70, 0/97) patients were less likely., Conclusions: Physicians appear to be following the reported statistical incidence of prostate cancer by race and ethnicity when using prostate biopsy or MRI for patients with elevated PSA levels. These results demonstrate the importance of publishing statistical data on disease incidence by race and ethnicity for informing physicians' decision-making.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has become integral to diagnosing and managing patients with suspected or confirmed prostate cancer. However, the benefits of utilizing MRI can be hindered by quality issues during imaging acquisition, interpretation, and reporting. As the utilization of prostate MRI continues to increase in clinical practice, the variability in MRI quality and how it can negatively impact patient care have become apparent. The American College of Radiology (ACR) has recognized this challenge and developed several initiatives to address the issue of inconsistent MRI quality and ensure that imaging centers deliver high-quality patient care. These initiatives include the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS), developed in collaboration with an international panel of experts and members of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR), the Prostate MR Image Quality Improvement Collaborative, which is part of the ACR Learning Network, the ACR Prostate Cancer MRI Center Designation, and the ACR Appropriateness Criteria. In this article, we will discuss the importance of these initiatives in establishing quality assurance and quality control programs for prostate MRI and how they can improve patient outcomes., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Three-dimensional (3D) printed anatomic models can facilitate presurgical planning by providing surgeons with detailed knowledge of the exact location of pertinent anatomical structures. Although 3D printed anatomic models have been shown to be useful for pre-operative planning, few studies have demonstrated how these models can influence quantitative surgical metrics., Objective: To prospectively assess whether patient-specific 3D printed prostate cancer models can improve quantitative surgical metrics in patients undergoing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP)., Methods: Patients with MRI-visible prostate cancer (PI-RADS V2 ≥ 3) scheduled to undergo RARP were prospectively enrolled in our IRB approved study (n = 82). Quantitative surgical metrics included the rate of positive surgical margins (PSMs), operative times, and blood loss. A qualitative Likert scale survey to assess understanding of anatomy and confidence regarding surgical approach was also implemented., Results: The rate of PSMs was lower for the 3D printed model group (8.11%) compared to that with imaging only (28.6%), p = 0.128. The 3D printed model group had a 9-min reduction in operating time (213 ± 42 min vs. 222 ± 47 min) and a 5 mL reduction in average blood loss (227 ± 148 mL vs. 232 ± 114 mL). Surgeon anatomical understanding and confidence improved after reviewing the 3D printed models (3.60 ± 0.74 to 4.20 ± 0.56, p = 0.62 and 3.86 ± 0.53 to 4.20 ± 0.56, p = 0.22)., Conclusions: 3D printed prostate cancer models can positively impact quantitative patient outcomes such as PSMs, operative times, and blood loss in patients undergoing RARP., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: With radiology practices increasingly employing nonphysician practitioners (NPPs), we aimed to characterize specific NPP clinical roles., Methods: Linking 2017 to 2019 Medicare data sets, we identified all claims-submitting nurse practitioners and physician assistants (together NPPs) employed by radiologists. NPP-billed services were identified, weighted by work relative value units, and categorized as (1) clinical evaluation and management (E&M), (2) invasive procedures, and (3) noninvasive imaging interpretation. NPP practice patterns were assessed temporally and using frequency analysis., Results: As the number of radiologist-employed NPPs submitting claims increased 16.3% (from 523 in 2017 to 608 in 2019), their aggregate Medicare fee-for-service work relative value units increased 17.3% (+40.0% for E&M [from 79,540 to 111,337]; +5.6% for procedures [from 179,044 to 189,003]; and +74.0% for imaging [from 5,087 to 8,850]). The number performing E&M, invasive procedures, and imaging interpretation increased 7.6% (from 329 to 354), 18.3% (from 387 to 458), and 31.8% (from 85 to 112), with 58.2%, 75.3%, and 18.4% billing those services in 2019. Paracentesis and thoracentesis were the most frequently billed invasive procedures. Fluoroscopic swallowing and bone densitometry examinations were the most frequently billed imaging services. By region, NPPs practicing as majority clinical E&M providers were most common in the Midwest (33.5%) and South (33.0%), majority proceduralists in the South (53.1%), and majority image interpreters in the Midwest (50.0%)., Conclusions: As radiology practices employ more NPPs, radiologist-employed NPPs' aggregate services have increased for E&M, invasive procedures, and imaging interpretation. Most radiologist-employed NPPs perform invasive procedures and E&M. Although performed by a small minority, imaging interpretation has shown the largest relative service growth., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The aim of the study was to compare the distribution of Prostate Imaging and Reporting Data System (PI-RADS) scores, interreader agreement, and diagnostic performance of PI-RADS v2.0 and v2.1 for transition zone (TZ) lesions., Methods: The study included 202 lesions in 202 patients who underwent 3T prostate magnetic resonance imaging showing a TZ lesion that was later biopsied with magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion. Five abdominal imaging faculty reviewed T2-weighted imaging and high b value/apparent diffusion coefficient images in 2 sessions. Cases were randomized using a crossover design whereby half in the first session were reviewed using v2.0 and the other half using v2.1, and vice versa for the 2nd session. Readers provided T2-weighted imaging and DWI scores, from which PI-RADS scores were derived., Results: Interreader agreement for all PI-RADS scores had κ of 0.37 (v2.0) and 0.26 (v2.1). For 4 readers, the percentage of lesions retrospectively scored PI-RADS 1 increased greater than 5% and PI-RADS 2 score decreased greater than 5% from v2.0 to v2.1. For 2 readers, the percentage scored PI-RADS 3 decreased greater than 5% and, for 2 readers, increased greater than 5%. The percentage of PI-RADS 4 and 5 lesions changed less than 5% for all readers. For the 4 readers with increased frequency of PI-RADS 1 using v2.1, 4% to 16% were Gleason score ≥3 + 4 tumor. Frequency of Gleason score ≥3 + 4 in PI-RADS 3 lesions increased for 2 readers and decreased for 1 reader. Sensitivity of PI-RADS of 3 or greater for Gleason score ≥3 + 4 ranged 76% to 90% (v2.0) and 69% to 96% (v2.1). Specificity ranged 32% to 64% (v2.0) and 25% to 72% (v2.1). Positive predictive value ranged 43% to 55% (v2.0) and 41% to 58% (v2.1). Negative predictive value ranged 82% to 87% (v2.0) and 81% to 91% (v2.1)., Conclusions: Poor interreader agreement and lack of improvement in diagnostic performance indicate an ongoing need to refine evaluation of TZ lesions., Competing Interests: A.B.R. received royalties from Thieme Medical Publishers and salary support for AJR editorship. The other authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The number and roles of US nonphysician practitioners (NPPs) have expanded considerably, but little is known about their use by radiology practices. The authors assessed characteristics and trends of radiology practices employing Medicare-recognized NPPs., Methods: Using Medicare databases from 2017 through 2019, the authors mapped all nurse practitioners and physician assistants (together "NPPs") to employer groups for which all physicians were radiologists ("radiology practices"). Practices were characterized by size, geography, and radiologist characteristics. Temporal changes were assessed, and NPP employment likelihood was estimated using multivariate logistic regression modeling., Results: As the number of US radiology practices declined by 36.5% (from 2,643 to 1,679) between 2017 and 2019, the number employing NPPs increased by 10.5% (from 228 [8.6%] to 252 [15.0%]). The number of radiologists in NPP-employing practices increased by 10.4% (from 6,596 [35.1%] to 7,282 [40.0%]) as the number of radiology-employed NPPs increased by 17.5% (from 588 to 691). Practices were more likely to employ NPPs when medium (odds ratio [OR], 1.31) or large (OR, 1.25) in size, when urban located (OR, 1.35), and as their percentages of interventional radiologists increased (OR, 5.53 per percentage point) (P < .01 for all). Practices were less likely to employ NPPs as mean radiologist years since completing training increased (OR, 0.99 per year; P < .01)., Conclusions: Employment of NPPs by radiology practices has grown considerably in recent years, particularly in larger and urban practices and in those that employ more interventional and early-career radiologists. More work is necessary to better understand how this expanding use of NPPs affects the specialty., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of enema and dietary restrictions on prostate MR image quality metrics and to assess inter-reader agreement for these metrics., Methods: This retrospective study included 195 men divided into groups based on their compliance with preparation instructions before prostate MRI (Enema + Diet, n = 98; Enema, n = 42; Diet, n = 35; Control [no compliance], n = 20). Four readers independently assessed six image quality metrics on a 5-point scale. Between-group comparisons were made using Wilcoxon rank sum test. Inter-reader agreement was calculated using Fleiss' kappa., Results: Compared with the Control group, image quality with respect to rectal stool/gas, distortion of diffusion-weighted images, overall image quality, and confidence in assessment was higher in the Enema + Diet, Enema, and Diet groups (p  < 0.05 for all comparisons). The Enema + Diet and Enema groups had significantly higher scores than the Diet group for rectal stool/gas (p < 0.001 and 0.005, respectively). The Enema + Diet and Diet groups had higher scores than the Control group for rectal peristalsis (p = 0.027 and 0.009, respectively), but there were no significant differences in motion artifacts on T2-weighted images. Agreement among readers was fair, with kappa values ranging from 0.25 to 0.37., Conclusion: Enema and dietary restriction can improve the quality of prostate MRI by decreasing rectal distension and distortion of diffusion-weighted images and by increasing reader confidence in image assessment. Inter-reader agreement using subjective criteria for analysis of MRI quality is fair., (Copyright © 2020 The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To assess the impact of instructional videos in patients' primary language on abdominal MR image quality for whom English is a second language (ESL)., Methods: Twenty-nine ESL patients viewed Spanish or Mandarin Chinese instructional videos (approximately 2.5 min in duration) in the preparation room before abdominal MRI (ESL-video group). Comparison groups included 50 ESL patients who underwent MRI before video implementation (ESL-no video group) and 81 English-speaking patients who were matched for age, sex, magnet strength, and history of prior MRI with patients in the first two groups. Three radiologists independently assessed respiratory motion and image quality on turbo spin-echo T2-weighted images (T2WI) and postcontrast T1-weighted images (T1WI) using 1 to 5 Likert scales. Groups were compared using Kruskal-Wallis tests as well as generalized estimating equations (GEEs) to adjust for possible confounders., Results: For T2WI respiratory motion and T2WI overall image quality, Likert scores of the ESL-no video group (mean score across readers of 2.6 ± 0.1 and 2.6 ± 0.1) were lower (all P < .001) compared with English-speaking (3.3 ± 0.2 and 3.3 ± 0.1) and ESL-video (3.2 ± 0.1 and 3.0 ± 0.2) groups. In the GEE model, mean T2WI respiratory motion (both adjusted P < .001) and T2WI overall quality (adjusted P = .03 and .11) were higher in English and ESL-video groups compared with ESL-no video group. For T1WI respiratory motion and T1WI overall image quality, Likert scores were not different between groups (P > .05), including in the GEE model (adjusted P > .05)., Conclusion: Providing ESL patients with an instructional video in their primary language before abdominal MRI is an effective intervention to improve imaging quality., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Prostate cancer screening and diagnosis exhibit known racial and ethnic disparities. Whether these disparities persist in prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) utilization after elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) results is poorly understood., Objective: To assess potential racial and ethnic disparities in prostate MRI utilization following elevated PSA results., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study of 794 809 insured US men was drawn from deidentified medical claims between January 2011 and December 2017 obtained from a commercial claims database. Eligible participants were aged 40 years and older and received a single PSA result and no prior PSA screening or prostate MRI claims. Analysis was performed in January 2021., Main Outcomes and Measures: Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine associations between elevated PSA results and follow-up prostate MRI. For patients receiving prostate MRI, multivariable regressions were estimated for the time between PSA and subsequent prostate MRI. PSA thresholds explored included PSA levels above 2.5 ng/mL, 4 ng/mL, and 10 ng/mL. Analyses were stratified by race, ethnicity, and age., Results: Of 794 809 participants, 51 500 (6.5%) had PSA levels above 4 ng/mL; of these, 1524 (3.0%) underwent prostate MRI within 180 days. In this sample, mean (SD) age was 59.8 (11.3) years (range 40-89 years); 31 350 (3.9%) were Asian, 75 935 (9.6%) were Black, 107 956 (13.6%) were Hispanic, and 455 214 (57.3%) were White. Compared with White patients, Black patients with PSA levels above 4 ng/mL and 10 ng/mL were 24.1% (odds ratio [OR], 0.78; 95% CI, 0.65-0.89) and 35.0% (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.50-0.85) less likely to undergo subsequent prostate MRI, respectively. Asian patients with PSA levels higher than 4 ng/mL (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.58-0.99) and Hispanic patients with PSA levels above 10 ng/mL (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.59-0.99) were also less likely to undergo subsequent prostate MRI compared with White patients. Black patients between ages 65 and 74 years with PSA above 4 ng/mL and 10 ng/mL were 23.6% (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64-0.91) and 43.9% (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.35-0.91) less likely to undergo MRI, respectively. Race and ethnicity were not significantly associated with mean time between PSA and MRI., Conclusions and Relevance: Among men with elevated PSA results, racial and ethnic disparities were evident in subsequent prostate MRI utilization and were more pronounced at higher PSA thresholds. Further research is needed to better understand and mitigate physician decision-making biases and other potential sources of disparities in prostate cancer diagnosis and management.

Augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) are burgeoning technologies that have the potential to greatly enhance patient care. Visualizing patient-specific three-dimensional (3D) imaging data in these enhanced virtual environments may improve surgeons' understanding of anatomy and surgical pathology, thereby allowing for improved surgical planning, superior intra-operative guidance, and ultimately improved patient care. It is important that radiologists are familiar with these technologies, especially since the number of institutions utilizing VR and AR is increasing. This article gives an overview of AR and VR and describes the workflow required to create anatomical 3D models for use in AR using the Microsoft HoloLens device. Case examples in urologic oncology (prostate cancer and renal cancer) are provided which depict how AR has been used to guide surgery at our institution., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Purpose: To retrospectively analyze the nature and extent of oncology-related errors accounting for malpractice allegations in diagnostic radiology., Methods: The Comparative Benchmarking System of the Controlled Risk Insurance Company, a database containing roughly 30% of medical malpractice claims in the United States, was searched retrospectively for the period 2008 to 2017. Claims naming radiology as a primary service were identified and were stratified and compared by oncologic versus nononcologic status, allegation type (diagnostic versus nondiagnostic), and imaging modality., Results: Over the 10-year period, radiology was the primary responsible service for 3.9% of all malpractice claims (2,582 of 66,061) and 12.8% of claims with diagnostic allegations (1,756 of 13,695). Oncology (neoplasms) accounted for 44.0% of radiology cases with diagnostic allegations, a larger share than any other category of medical condition. Among radiology cases with diagnostic allegations, high-severity harm occurred in 79% of oncologic but just 42% of nononcologic cases. Of all oncologic radiology cases, 97.4% had diagnostic allegations, and just 55.0% of nononcologic radiology cases had diagnostic allegations. Imaging misinterpretation was a contributing factor for a large majority (80.7% [623 of 772]) of oncologic radiology cases with diagnostic allegations. The modalities most commonly used in oncologic radiology cases with diagnostic allegations involving misinterpretation were mammography and CT., Conclusion: Oncology represents the largest source of radiology malpractice cases with diagnostic allegations. Oncologic radiology malpractice cases are more likely than nononcologic radiology cases to be due to diagnostic errors. Furthermore, compared with those that are nononcologic, oncologic radiology cases with diagnostic allegations are more likely to be associated with high-severity harm. Efforts are warranted to reduce misinterpretations of oncologic imaging., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of this study was to temporally characterize radiologist participation in Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) accountable care organizations (ACOs)., Methods: Using CMS Physician and Other Supplier Public Use Files, ACO provider-level Research Identifiable Files, and Shared Savings Program ACO Public-Use Files for 2013 through 2018, characteristics of radiologist ACO participation were assessed over time., Results: Between 2013 and 2018, the percentage of Medicare-participating radiologists affiliated with MSSP ACOs increased from 10.4% to 34.9%. During that time, the share of large ACOs (>20,000 beneficiaries) with participating radiologists averaged 87.0%, and the shares of medium ACOs (10,000-20,000) and small ACOs (<10,000) with participating radiologists rose from 62.5% to 66.0% and from 26.3% to 51.6%, respectively. The number of physicians in MSSP ACOs with radiologists was substantially larger than those without radiologists (mean range across years, 573-945 versus 107-179). Primary care physicians constituted a larger percentage of the physician population for ACOs without radiologists (average across years, 66.3% versus 38.5%), and ACOs with radiologists had a higher rate of specialist representation (56.0% versus 33.7%). Beneficiary age, race, and sex demographics were similar among radiologist-participating versus nonparticipating ACOs., Conclusions: In recent years, radiologist participation in MSSP ACOs has increased substantially. ACOs with radiologist participation are large and more diverse in their physician specialty composition. Nonparticipating radiologists should prepare accordingly., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background Factors affecting radiologists' performance in screening mammography interpretation remain poorly understood. Purpose To identify radiologists characteristics that affect screening mammography interpretation performance. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included 1223 radiologists in the National Mammography Database (NMD) from 2008 to 2019 who could be linked to Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) datasets. NMD screening performance metrics were extracted. Acceptable ranges were defined as follows: recall rate (RR) between 5% and 12%; cancer detection rate (CDR) of at least 2.5 per 1000 screening examinations; positive predictive value of recall (PPV1) between 3% and 8%; positive predictive value of biopsies recommended (PPV2) between 20% and 40%; positive predictive value of biopsies performed (PPV3) between the 25th and 75th percentile of study sample; invasive CDR of at least the 25th percentile of the study sample; and percentage of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of at least the 25th percentile of the study sample. Radiologist characteristics extracted from CMS datasets included demographics, subspecialization, and clinical practice patterns. Multivariable stepwise logistic regression models were performed to identify characteristics independently associated with acceptable performance for the seven metrics. The most influential characteristics were defined as those independently associated with the majority of the metrics (at least four). Results Relative to radiologists practicing in the Northeast, those in the Midwest were more likely to achieve acceptable RR, PPV1, PPV2, and CDR (odds ratio [OR], 1.4-2.5); those practicing in the West were more likely to achieve acceptable RR, PPV2, and PPV3 (OR, 1.7-2.1) but less likely to achieve acceptable invasive CDR (OR, 0.6). Relative to general radiologists, breast imagers were more likely to achieve acceptable PPV1, invasive CDR, percentage DCIS, and CDR (OR, 1.4-4.4). Those performing diagnostic mammography were more likely to achieve acceptable PPV1, PPV2, PPV3, invasive CDR, and CDR (OR, 1.9-2.9). Those performing breast US were less likely to achieve acceptable PPV1, PPV2, percentage DCIS, and CDR (OR, 0.5-0.7). Conclusion The geographic location of the radiology practice, subspecialization in breast imaging, and performance of diagnostic mammography are associated with better screening mammography performance; performance of breast US is associated with lower performance. © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Rationale and Objectives: To assess gender balance amongst invited speakers at 2 national radiology conferences over the past decade., Materials and Methods: The 2009, 2014, and 2019 Association of University Radiologists (AUR) and American Roentgen Ray Society (ARRS) conference programs were evaluated for the number and gender of invited speakers, as well as various presentation characteristics. Gender balance was stratified across conferences and years., Results: The final analysis included 1657 invited speakers and 45, 602 minutes of presentation. AUR showed a nonsignificant increase in the percent of presentations by women from 42.2% to 46.5% and in the percent of distinct female presenters from 41.6% to 46.0%. For ARRS, percentage of female presenters varied minimally from 36.1% to 38.2%. In AUR 2009, female presenters spoke on average 5.7min less than men (P= 0.042) and 6.5% of women gave lectures over 30 minutes vs 22.2% of men (P = 0.032). Subsequent AUR and ARRS conferences did not demonstrate presentation length disparities. For AUR, no keynote female speaker was identified. For ARRS, there was no significant difference in percentage of keynote speakers based on gender (P ≥0.516). A disproportionately high percentage of presentations before 8am (44.4%-66.7%) were by women., Conclusion: Female representation was greater than among the overall radiology workforce, highlighting a role of national societies in promoting female radiologists. Nonetheless, such representation is confounded by disproportionate underrepresentation in visibility of invited talks. While improvement in some presentation measures were observed, continued efforts are warranted to promote equal opportunities for female radiologists at national conferences., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Purpose: Lumbar punctures may be performed by many different types of health care providers. We evaluated the percentages of lumbar punctures performed by radiologists-versus-nonradiologist providers, including changes with time and discrepancies between specialties., Materials and Methods: Lumbar puncture procedure claims were identified in a 5% sample of Medicare beneficiaries from 2004 to 2017 and classified by provider specialty, site of service, day of week, and patient complexity. Compound annual growth rates for 2004 versus 2017 were calculated; t test and χ 2 statistical analyses were performed., Results: Lumbar puncture use increased from 163.3 to 203.4 procedures per 100,000 Medicare beneficiaries from 2004 to 2017 (overall rate, 190.3). Concurrently, the percentage of lumbar punctures performed by radiologists increased from 37.1% to 54.0%, while proportions performed by other major physician specialty groups either declined (eg, neurologists from 23.5% to 10.0%) or were largely unchanged. While radiologists saw the largest absolute increase in the percentage of procedures, the largest relative increase occurred for nonphysician providers (4.2% in 2004 to 7.5% in 2017; +78.6%). In 2017, radiologists performed most procedures on weekdays (56.2%) and a plurality on weekends (38.2%). Comorbidity was slightly higher in patients undergoing lumbar puncture by radiologists ( P < .001)., Conclusions: Radiologists now perform most lumbar puncture procedures for Medicare beneficiaries in both the inpatient and outpatient settings. The continuing shift in lumbar puncture responsibility from other specialists to radiologists has implications for clinical workflows, cost, radiation exposure, and postgraduate training., (© 2021 by American Journal of Neuroradiology.)