Disclosure of the Resident Role in the Interventional Radiology Suite: How Do Interventional Radiologists Balance Patient Care and Resident Education?

PURPOSE: The study sought to assess how academic interventional radiologists determine and disclose to patients the intraprocedural role of radiology residents in the interventional radiology (IR) suite. METHODS: A qualitative study consisting of in-person interviews with 9 academic interventional radiologists from 3 hospitals was conducted. Interviews were transcribed, and underwent modified thematic analysis. RESULTS: Seven themes emerged. 1) Interventional radiologists permit residents to perform increasingly complex procedures with graded responsibility. While observed technical ability is important in determining the extent of resident participation, possessing good judgement and knowing personal limitations are paramount. 2) Interventional radiologists do not explicitly inform patients in detail about residents' intraprocedural role, as trainee involvement is viewed as implicit at academic institutions. 3) While patients are advised of resident participation in IR procedures, detailed disclosure of their role is viewed as potentially detrimental to both patient well-being and trainee education. 4) Interventional radiologists believe that patients might be less likely to refuse resident involvement if they meet them prior to procedures. 5) While it is rare that patients refuse resident participation in their care, interventional radiologists' duty to respect patient autonomy supersedes their obligation to resident education. 6) Interventional radiologists are responsible for any intraprocedural, trainee-related complication. 7) Trainees should be present when complications are disclosed to patients. CONCLUSION: Interventional radiologists recognize the confidence placed in them, and they do not inform patients in detail about residents' role in IR procedures. Respecting patient autonomy is paramount, and while rare, obeying patients' wishes can potentially be at the expense of resident education.

La Radiología y el efecto mariposa / No disponible

No disponible

La radiología musculoesquelética en el catálogo de prestaciones radiológicas de la SERAM / Musculoskeletal imaging in the SERAM's catalogue of services

No disponible

Interventional oncology: the future.

Interventional radiology techniques to treat oncological disease have already shown value in adults. The adoption and development of interventional oncology (IO) in children have been more limited and challenging. This relates to the approval process for new devices and agents, oncology group protocol limitations and the inherent hesitation of trying new treatments in children. This paper will discuss how new procedures are developed and approved, and the new therapies that will become available to better treat pediatric malignancies. Bringing the benefits of IO to children will require initiative on the part of pediatric diagnostic and interventional radiologists as well as the cooperation of our clinical colleagues.

Interventional neuroradiology: the role of experimental models in scientific progress.

SUMMARY: The ultimate methodology necessary to adopt a treatment as generally beneficial is the randomized controlled trial, a method designed by and for clinicians to maximize the care of their patients in the presence of uncertainty. Some selection is however necessary to limit trials to more promising and less risky endeavors. Experimental models are the privileged answer to the problem of finding scientific evidence while refraining from harming patients in the course of this pursuit. They allow a step by step assessment, from simple but artificial settings to more complex and realistic animal models. But the use of animal models can only be justified if the community can be convinced that alternatives have been considered but are invalid, when the project is scientifically sound and methodologically irreproachable. As neurointerventional methods develop and gain wider clinical applications, progress should proceed in an orderly fashion, within limits set by prudence and human values, from the less risky, costly, time consuming methods, to the more definite, pragmatic, labor intensive but inescapable clinical trials. Each step is essential and the sequence cannot be violated without risks of errors that eventually translate into clinical morbidity.