Immediate Access to Radiology Reports: Perspectives on X Before and After the Cures Act Information Blocking Provision.

OBJECTIVE: The 21st Century Cures Act's information blocking provision mandates that patients have immediate access to their electronic health information, including radiology reports. We evaluated public opinions surrounding this policy on X, a microblogging platform with over 400 million users. METHODS: We retrieved 27,522 posts related to radiology reports from October 5, 2020, through October 4, 2021. One reviewer performed initial screening for relevant posts. Two reviewers categorized user type and post theme(s) using a predefined coding system. Posts were grouped as "pre-Cures" (6 months before information blocking) and "post-Cures" (6 months after). Descriptive statistics and χ2 tests were performed. RESULTS: Among 1,155 final posts, 1,028 unique users were identified (64% patients, 11% non-radiologist physicians, 4% radiologists). X activity increased, with 40% (n = 462) pre-Cures and 60% (n = 693) post-Cures. Early result notification before referring providers was the only theme that significantly increased post-Cures (+3%, P = .001). Common negative themes were frustration (33%), anxiety (27%), and delay (20%). Common positive themes were gratitude for radiologists (52%) and autonomy (21%). Of posts expressing opinions on early access, 84% favored and 16% opposed it, with decreased preference between study periods (P = .006). More patients than physicians preferred early access (92% versus 40%, P < .0001). DISCUSSION: X activity increased after the information blocking provision, partly due to conversation about early notification. Despite negative experiences with reports, most users preferred early access. Although the Cures Act is a positive step toward open access, work remains to improve patients' engagement with their radiology results.

Intraoperative Verapamil Fails to Reduce Delayed Graft Function in Donation After Circulatory Death Renal Allografts.

BACKGROUND: The shortage of transplantable organs has led to increased utilization of kidneys that may be particularly vulnerable to ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) and delayed graft function (DGF). Kidneys from donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors have additional IRI from donor procurement that results in increased risk of DGF. Verapamil may reduce IRI in kidney allografts when given at the time of organ reperfusion. This study sought to determine if intraoperative administration of verapamil (Ver) could reduce the risk of DGF in DCD kidney transplants. METHODS: A single-center retrospective matched cohort study was performed of 93 Ver (-) kidney transplant recipients compared with 93 Ver (+) kidney transplant recipients, matched by donor age, Kidney Donor Profile Index, and DCD status. Covariates that could impact DGF risk were evaluated by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: The Ver (-) and Ver (+) matched cohorts did not have any significant differences in the demographic covariates. There was no difference in DGF rate between the Ver cohorts in either the overall study population or within the DCD subgroup. There was a trend toward reduced DGF in the Ver (+) cohort for cold ischemia time (CIT) ≤24 h, but this failed to achieve statistical significance. On multivariate analysis, only CIT was found to be independently associated with DGF. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative verapamil failed to reduce DGF risk in DCD kidney allografts. Limitations to this study include nonrandomization for the intraoperative administration of verapamil and the mean CIT >24 h in the study population. Only CIT was an independent prognosticator for DGF on multivariate analysis in a cohort matched for DCD status, consistent with prior studies.

Role of social and non-social online media: how to properly leverage your internet presence for professional development and research.

The internet has become an integral component of daily life, with its content broadly grouped into social media and non-social online content. The use of social media, comprising interactive information sharing and networking tools, has proliferated in radiology, with as many as 85% of radiologists utilizing social media and adoption by both private and academic practices. In radiology, social media has been used to increase patient and public awareness of the specialty, establish a professional brand, share scholarly activity, aid in professional development and recruitment, improve communication, and increase engagement during scientific meetings. Organizations like the Society of Abdominal Radiology have increased the visibility of abdominal and pelvic radiology through their activity on social media; however, individual radiologists are integral to this function as well. In this article, we outline a stepwise approach to the individual use of social media, with practical tips for radiologists interested in effectively engaging the plethora of social media and non-social online content available. We also briefly discuss an approach to performing research using publicly available online media.

Radiology Content on TikTok: Current Use of a Novel Video-Based Social Media Platform and Opportunities for Radiology.

PURPOSE: TikTok, the fastest growing social media application worldwide, has been infrequently studied in medicine. We analyzed the top radiology-related posts on TikTok in order to describe opportunities for radiology engagement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrieved the top 300 posts meeting the search criteria "radiology." User- and post-related data were categorized based on a prespecified coding system. Descriptive statistics were reported. Kruskal-Wallis H and Mann-Whitney U tests were performed to assess for differences in followers, plays, likes, and comments among posts and users. RESULTS: 284 working posts were broadcast by 187 unique users with median 119 followers (interquartile range [IQR]: 31-1,206) and 20 posts (IQR: 7-49). Most (81%, 151/187) were nonphysician radiology personnel, while only 5% (9/187) were radiologists. Posts by radiologists had more plays than those by nonphysician radiology personnel (median 3643 vs 1282, P = 0.001). The 284 posts had median 1520 plays (IQR 429-4374), 60 likes (IQR 18-272), and 2 comments (IQR 0-9). Most posts were work-related (184/284, 65%), followed by clinical (68/284, 24%), personal (30/284, 11%), or promotional (2/284, 1%). However, posts by radiologists were mostly clinical (65%, 31/48) and represented a large majority of posted imaging cases (29/33, 88%). Posts about COVID-19 represented 38% (107/284) of the study sample and 48% (93/193) of posts after the first U.S. COVID-19 case COVID-19 posts had significantly more comments (3 vs. 2, P = 0.034) and more likes approaching significance (89 vs 51, P = 0.134) than non-COVID-19 posts. CONCLUSIONS: Though radiologists represent a minority of TikTok users their post represent the majority of this platform's clinical content. This presents an important opportunity for radiologists to utilize TikTok for contemporary, unique content creation and engagement with nonphysician radiology personnel.

Current State of Membership Diversity Among North American Radiology Societies: Analysis of Public Information on Society Websites.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Diversity is an identified priority amongst governing medical bodies. We systematically analyzed public membership diversity data posted by North American radiology societies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two independent study members reviewed North American radiology society websites to collect public data on membership diversity, specifically related to gender, race, and sexual orientation or gender identity, and categorized data using a coding system. Supplemental searches were conducted to confirm findings. Study team members created accounts on each society website to identify whether diversity data was collected during member enrollment. RESULTS: We reviewed a total of 26 society websites, with median 1500 members (range 110-54,600). We categorized five societies as "diversity leaders" based on having diversity statement(s), diversity initiatives, and diversity publication(s). While 62%, 8%, and 0% of societies collected data on gender, race, and sexual orientation or gender identity, respectively, no societies posted membership composition of these groups. Fourty-six percent of societies had membership diversity statement(s) on their webpages. Fifty-four percent had initiative(s) targeted at diversity (23% had multiple). Fifty percent had membership diversity publication(s). Sexual orientation and gender identity minority members were least frequently specified as beneficiaries of diversity statements, initiatives, and publications. Societies with larger memberships were more likely to have membership diversity initiatives (p = 0.01), journal articles on membership diversity (p = 0.005), and be "diversity leaders" (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Public support of membership diversity by many North American radiology societies, especially those with fewer members, is lacking. Identified "diversity leaders" can serve as models for societies aiming to establish their commitment to diversity.