The current radiology landscape has an imbalance between the rising demand for radiology services and the national radiologist workforce available. More vacant radiology positions exist than graduating radiology trainees. The origins of this problem are complex and require long-term solutions. Rather than working longer and/or faster, radiologists can work smarter. In this article, we present multiple short-term strategies to increase the effective radiologist workforce and/or increase workforce efficiency, to alleviate the current workload challenges. These strategies are derived from an analysis of possible practice-level changes in personnel, process, and physical plant. The impacts of the potential changes are estimated. No single change addresses the mismatch between supply and demand for radiology services. By creating an inventory of potential solutions, practices can choose the potential mechanism(s) to address the workforce shortage that best fit their needs and local environment.

Purpose The aim of this study was to analyze current radiology practice types, specific subspecialty needs, employment trends, and retirement trends. Methods ACR members, nonmembers, and Radiology Business Management Association members were surveyed using predominantly structured closed-ended questions about a variety of current and recent radiology practice characteristics. Responses were group practice deduplicated and weighted. Results Of 1,702 survey respondents, 64% were men, with a median age of 51 years. In 2021, 62% of responding practices hired radiologists, with the average practice hiring 2 radiologists and academic practices on average hiring the most (3.5). Most radiologists (87%) were hired for full-time positions, with independent practices hiring the largest proportion of part-time positions. Body and breast imagers represented the largest numbers of hired radiologists (17% each). Practices anticipated similar hiring patterns in 2022, prioritizing breast (37%) and body (35%) imaging. Of all practice types, academic groups were least likely to prioritize general radiologist hiring. A large majority (82%) of radiology practices permit remote work (teleradiology), more common at academic than other practices. Of currently employed radiologists, 16% plan to seek new employment in the next year; early-career radiologists indicated the highest likelihood (92%) and academic radiologists the lowest (66%) of remaining in the same practice for at least 5 years. A large majority of practices (80%) reported no radiologist retirements in 2021. Of those retiring, the average age was 75 years, and 66% worked full-time until retirement. Conclusions Radiologist recruiting remains robust. Current information on practice characteristics may help inform radiology practice leaders seeking to right-size their groups.

The ACR Commission on Human Resources' annual workforce survey has served as a helpful point of reference for practices across the country, in both determining practice types and sizes, along with demographic data on radiologists, including subspecialty distribution, and reviewing hiring and retirement trends. However, prior surveys had very little information about the composition of the pediatric radiology workforce, which to date has been experiencing a major shortage, owing to increased volumes and staffing demands and subspecialization within pediatric radiology, and exacerbated by the reduced number of trainees selecting the subspecialty for fellowship training [1,2].

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.

The landscape of the radiology workforce is changing, especially in the diversity of the demographics of practicing radiologists across subspecialties, practice types, and leadership positions in both academic and nonacademic settings. The 2021 ACR/Radiology Business Management Association Workforce Survey examines these facets in detail and contributes to our understanding of the current state of diversity in the radiology workforce and potential barriers to change. The results suggest opportunities and future directions for improving diversity, equity, and inclusion.

The 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), a US federal labor law, requires covered employers to provide eligible employees with up to 12 work weeks (in a 12-month period) of job-protected, unpaid leave for specific family and medical reasons. These reasons can be experienced by all genders and include caring for a new child, for oneself, or for an immediate family member experiencing a serious medical condition. Physicians, including radiologists, are not immune to these and thus also make use of leave for FMLA reasons, and yet little is known about trends in the use of FMLA.

Rationale and objectives: To evaluate prevalence and demographic factors associated with both burnout and fulfillment of private practice radiologist leaders within the United States. Materials and methods: The study cohort was the largest coalition of wholly radiologist owned, independently practicing radiology groups within the United States. Two designated leaders within each of the 30 radiology private practices within the organization Strategic Radiology were electronically mailed a weblink to a confidential IRB-approved survey in July 2021. Surveys included questions from the Stanford Professional Fulfillment Index, individual and practice demographics, and self-care. Results: The overall response rate was 67% (40/60). Fulfillment and burnout scores were calculated from the individual questions, and radiologists were classified as being fulfilled or not and burned out or not based upon score cutoffs previously validated from the Stanford Professional Fulfillment Index (PFI). The overall professional fulfillment rate of staff was 43% and the overall burnout rate was 33%. (Cronbach's alpha = 0.90 for fulfillment and 0.91 for burnout). The inverse correlation between professional fulfillment and burnout was highly significant (r =-0.42, p = 0.007). No statistically significant association was seen between either burnout or fulfillment and age, gender, ethnicity, practice geography or practice size. Conclusion: Utilizing the validated Stanford PFI for assessment, the prevalence of burnout in private practice radiologist leaders was 33%. The prevalence of professional fulfillment was 43%, with a mild inverse association between professional fulfillment and burnout. Summary: In private practice leaders, the prevalence of burnout was 33% and the prevalence of professional fulfillment was 43%.

This article explores the development of computer-aided detection (CAD) and artificial or augmented intelligence (AI) for breast radiology examinations and describes the current applications of AI in breast imaging. Although radiologists in other subspecialties may be less familiar with the use of these technologies in their practices, CAD has been used in breast imaging for more than two decades, as mammography CAD programs have been commercially available in the United States since the late 1990s. Likewise, breast radiologists have seen payment for CAD in mammography and breast MRI evolve over time. With the rapid expansion of AI products in radiology in recent years, many new applications for these technologies in breast imaging have emerged. This article outlines the current state of reimbursement for breast radiology AI algorithms within the traditional fee-for-service model used by Medicare and commercial insurers as well as potential future payment pathways. In addition, the inherent challenges of employing the existing payment framework in the United States to AI programs in radiology are detailed for the reader. This article aims to give breast radiologists a better understanding of how AI will be reimbursed as they seek to further incorporate these emerging technologies into their practices to advance patient care and improve workflow efficiency.

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.

Rationale and objectives: While radiology training programs aim to prepare trainees for clinical practice, the relationship between trainee, and national radiology workforce demands is unclear. This study assesses changing radiology trainee neuroimaging workloads nationwide for neuroimaging studies. Materials and methods: Using aggregate Medicare claims files from 2002 to 2018, we identified all computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) examinations of the brain, head and neck, and spine (hereafter "neuroimaging") in Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries nationwide. Using separate Medicare files, we calculated population utilization rates, and work relative value unit (wRVU) weights of all diagnostic neuroradiology services. Using claims modifiers, we identified services rendered by radiology trainees. Using separate national trainee enrollment files, we calculated mean annual per trainee wRVUs. Results: Between 2002 and 2018, total Medicare neuroimaging claims increased for both radiologists overall (86.1%) and trainees (162.5%), including increases in both CT (102.9% vs 196.8%), and MR (59.9% vs 106.6%). The national percentage of all radiologist neuroimaging wRVUs rendered by trainees increased 46.1% (3.8% of all wRVUs nationally in 2002 to 5.6% in 2018). National trainee increases were present across all neuroimaging services but greatest for head and neck CT (+86.5%). Mean annual per radiology trainee neuroimaging Medicare wRVUs increased +174.9% (42.1 per trainee in 2002 to 115.70 in 2018). Mean per trainee wRVU increases were greatest for spine CT (+394.2%) but present across all neuroimaging services. Conclusion: As neuroimaging utilization in Medicare beneficiaries has grown, radiology trainee neuroimaging workloads have increased disproportionately.

Current descriptions of ultrasound evaluations, including use of the term “point-of-care ultrasound” (POCUS), are imprecise because they are predicated on distinctions based on the device used to obtain images, the location where the images were obtained, the provider who obtained the images, or the focus of the examination. This is confusing because it does not account for more meaningful distinctions based on the setting, comprehensiveness, and completeness of the evaluation. In this article, the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound and the members of the American College of Radiology Ultrasound Commission articulate a map of the ultrasound landscape that divides sonographic evaluations into four distinct categories on the basis of setting, comprehensiveness, and completeness. Details of this classification scheme are elaborated, including important clarifications regarding what ensures comprehensiveness and completeness. Practical implications of this framework for future research and reimbursement paradigms are highlighted.

Purpose: To assess recent trends and characteristics in radiologist-practice separation across the United States. Methods: Using the Medicare Physician Compare and Medicare Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File data sets, we linked all radiologists to associated group practices annually between 2014 and 2018 and assessed radiologist-practice separation over a variety of physician and group characteristics. Multivariate logistic regression modeling was used to estimate the likelihood of radiologist-practice separation. Results: Of 25,228 unique radiologists associated with 4,381 unique group practices, 41.1% separated from at least one group practice between 2014 and 2018, and annual separation rates increased 38.4% over time (13.8% from 2014 to 2015 to 19.2% from 2017 to 2018). Radiologist-practice separation rates ranged from 57.4% in Utah to 26.3% in Virginia. Separation rates were 42.8% for general radiologists versus 38.2% for subspecialty radiologists. Among subspecialists, separation rates ranged from 43.0% for breast imagers to 33.5% for cardiothoracic radiologists. Early career status (odds ratio [OR] = 1.286) and late (OR = 1.554) career status were both independent positive predictors of radiologist-practice separation (both P < .001). Larger practice size (OR = 0.795), radiology-only (versus multispecialty) group (OR = 0.468), academic (versus nonacademic) practice (OR = 0.709), and abdominal (OR = 0.820), musculoskeletal (OR = 0.659), and neuroradiology (OR = 0.895) subspecialization were independent negative predictors (all P <.05). Conclusions: With over 40% of radiologists separating from at least one practice in recent years, the US radiologist workforce is highly and increasingly mobile. Because reasons for separation (eg, resignation, practice acquisition) cannot be assessed using administrative data, further attention is warranted given the manifold financial, operational, and patient care implications.