Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Clinical Practice Patterns of Interventional Radiologists by Gender.
Rosenkrantz, Andrew B; Englander, Meridith J; Deipolyi, Amy R; Findeiss, Laura; Duszak, Richard.
Afiliación
  • Rosenkrantz AB; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, 660 First Ave, 3rd Fl, New York, NY 10016.
  • Englander MJ; Department of Radiology, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY.
  • Deipolyi AR; Interventional Radiology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY.
  • Findeiss L; Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA.
  • Duszak R; Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA.
AJR Am J Roentgenol ; 213(4): 867-874, 2019 10.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31268735
OBJECTIVE. Given recent specialty attention to workforce diversity, we aimed to characterize potential gender differences in the practice patterns of interventional radiologists (IRs). MATERIALS AND METHODS. Using Medicare claims data, we identified IRs on the basis of the distribution of their billed clinical work effort and descriptively characterized practice patterns by gender. RESULTS. Women represented 8.2% (241/2936) of all IRs identified nationally. Female representation varied geographically (≤ 2% in nine states, ≥ 20% in three states) and by career stage (9.4% among early-career IRs and 6.4% among late-career IRs; 18.8% among early-career IRs in the Northeast). For both female IRs and male IRs, interventional case mixes were similar across service categories (e.g., venous and hemodialysis access, arterial and venous interventions, biopsies and drainages) and by procedural complexity (e.g., 5.7% vs 4.3% for low-complexity procedures and 59.5% vs 61.3% for high-complexity procedures). Average patient complexity scores were also similar for female (2.7 ± 12 [SD]) and male (2.8 ± 12) IRs. Female IRs spent slightly lower portions of their work effort rendering invasive services (66.5% vs 70.0%, respectively) and noninvasive diagnostic imaging (19.0% vs 22.2%) than male IRs but spent more time in evaluation and management clinical visits (14.5% vs 7.9%). Both female IRs and male IRs rendered a majority of their services to female patients (53.4% vs 53.1%). CONCLUSION. Although women remain underrepresented in interventional radiology, female IRs' interventional case composition, procedural complexity, and patient complexity are similar to those of their male colleagues. Female IRs' higher proportion of evaluation and management clinical visits supports the specialty's increased focus on longitudinal care so that interventional radiology will thrive alongside other clinical specialties.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina / Radiología Intervencionista / Radiólogos Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies Límite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male País/Región como asunto: America do norte Idioma: En Revista: AJR Am J Roentgenol Año: 2019 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina / Radiología Intervencionista / Radiólogos Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies Límite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male País/Región como asunto: America do norte Idioma: En Revista: AJR Am J Roentgenol Año: 2019 Tipo del documento: Article