Health for All: A Report of the 2020 Association of American Medical Colleges Learn Serve Lead Meeting.

Learn Serve Lead (LSL) is the signature annual conference of the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC), which focuses on the most pressing issues facing American medical practice and education. Unsurprisingly, the recent AAMC LSL conference at the end of 2020 centered on the multifaceted impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and racial inequity upon the medical community. At the LSL meeting, national leaders, practicing physicians from diverse specialties, and medical trainees discussed the impact of these challenges and ongoing strategies to overcome them. These efforts paralleled the AAMC mission areas of community collaborations, medical education, clinical care, and research. Additionally, this focus aligns with the ACR's core purpose: to serve patients and society by empowering members to advance the practice, science, and professions of radiological care. ACR is a member of the AAMC Council of Faculty and Academic Society and seeks to collaborate with other medical specialties to promote interdisciplinary collaboration, contribute to medical education, and voice the value of medical imaging for patient care. We summarize the major insights of this interdisciplinary conference and present tailored recommendations for applying these insights specifically within the radiology community. In addition, we review the parallels between the ACR and the AAMC strategic plans.

What's in a Name? Report of the ACR Task Force on General Radiology and Multi-Subspecialization.

The ACR Council passed Resolution 47 at its 2020 annual meeting establishing a representative task force (TF) to explore the concept of the "multispecialty radiologist," previously proposed in 2012. The TF held eight virtual meetings over 8 months, considered data from a 2020 ACR Membership Tracking Survey, conducted a review of current literature, and collected anecdotal experience from TF members and ACR leadership. ACR legal counsel and a cross-section of ACR Commissions and Committees also provided input. The TF concluded that there is scant interest from the radiology community in the multispecialty radiologist title and no agreed-upon definition for the term. Radiologists may identify as diagnostic or subspecialty radiologists; however, the roles they fill in clinical practice include general, multispecialty, and subspecialized radiology. The TF proposes definitions for each of these terms to support radiologist recruitment aligned with optimal patient care in the practice community and to improve the quality of data collection about the field. To reduce ambiguity, the TF proposes adoption of the defined terms by the radiology community, including radiologist recruiters and employers, and suggests ways in which resident training and the ABR board examination can be adapted to support this new structure. Additionally, as part of an exploration of hyperspecialization and trainee preparedness for clinical practice, the TF discussed the challenges faced by community-based practices seeking to provide a full range of high-quality, radiologist-delivered diagnostic and interventional services to their patient populations.

Predicted Cost Savings Achieved by the Radiology Support, Communication and Alignment Network from Reducing Medical Imaging Overutilization in the Medicare Population.

OBJECTIVE: The Radiology Support, Communication and Alignment Network (R-SCAN) is a quality improvement program through which patients, referring clinicians, and radiologists collaborate to improve imaging appropriateness based on Choosing Wisely recommendations and ACR Appropriateness Criteria. R-SCAN was shown previously to increase the odds of obtaining an appropriate, higher patient or diagnostic value, imaging study. In the current study, we aimed to estimate the potential imaging cost savings associated with R-SCAN use for the Medicare population. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The R-SCAN data set was used to determine the proportion of appropriate and lesser value imaging studies performed, as well as the percent change in the total number of imaging studies performed, before and after an R-SCAN educational intervention. Using a separate CMS data set, we then identified the total number of relevant imaging studies and associated total costs using a 5% sample of Medicare beneficiaries in 2017. We applied R-SCAN proportions to the CMS data set to estimate the potential impact of the R-SCAN interventions across a broader Medicare population. RESULTS: We observed a substantial reduction in the costs associated with lesser value imaging in the R-SCAN cohort, totaling $260,000 over 3.5 months. When extrapolated to the Medicare population, the potential cost reductions associated with the decrease in lesser value imaging totaled $433 million yearly. CONCLUSION: If expanded broadly, R-SCAN interventions can result in substantial savings to the Medicare program.

Assessment of the Radiology Support, Communication and Alignment Network to Reduce Medical Imaging Overutilization: A Multipractice Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine whether participation in Radiology Support, Communication and Alignment Network (R-SCAN) results in a reduction of inappropriate imaging in a wide range of real-world clinical environments. METHODS: This quality improvement study used imaging data from 27 US academic and private practices that completed R-SCAN projects between January 25, 2015, and August 8, 2018. Each project consisted of baseline, educational (intervention), and posteducational phases. Baseline and posteducational imaging cases were rated as high, medium, or low value on the basis of validated ACR Appropriateness Criteria®. Four cohorts were generated: a comprehensive cohort that included all eligible practices and three topic-specific cohorts that included practices that completed projects of specific Choosing Wisely topics (pulmonary embolism, adnexal cyst, and low back pain). Changes in the proportion of high-value cases after R-SCAN intervention were assessed for each cohort using generalized estimating equation logistic regression, and changes in the number of low-value cases were analyzed using Poisson regression. RESULTS: Use of R-SCAN in the comprehensive cohort resulted in a greater proportion of high-value imaging cases (from 57% to 79%; odds ratio, 2.69; 95% confidence interval, 1.50-4.86; P = .001) and 345 fewer low-value cases after intervention (incidence rate ratio, 0.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-0.70; P < .001). Similar changes in proportion of high-value cases and number of low-value cases were found for the pulmonary embolism, adnexal cyst, and low back pain cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: R-SCAN participation was associated with a reduced likelihood of inappropriate imaging and is thus a promising tool to enhance the quality of patient care and promote wise use of health care resources.

A Secondary Analysis to Identify Patient-Centered Outcomes in the ACR's Appropriateness Criteria.

CONTEXT: There is a growing body of literature indicating imaging testing can affect patients cognitively, socially, behaviorally, and emotionally. The extent to which these patient-centered outcomes (PCOs) are reported in the imaging literature is unclear. Identifying PCOs may facilitate shared decision making around imaging testing. OBJECTIVE: To identify PCOs across a spectrum of clinical topics included in the ACR's Appropriateness Criteria (AC). METHODS: We systematically reviewed AC evidence tables for eligible articles of studies conducted in any clinical setting in high-income countries. Included studies reported PCOs occurring as a direct or indirect result of an imaging test performed for any reason (eg, diagnosis, screening, surveillance, or staging). PCOs and the methods used to measure them were extracted through a secondary analysis and descriptive synthesis. RESULTS: Our search identified 89 articles that reported outcomes of radiation exposure (n = 37), downstream testing (n = 20), complications (n = 19), incidental findings (n = 10), quality of life (n = 7), physical discomfort (n = 5), patient values and experiences (n = 4), patient financial and time costs (n = 4), psychosocial outcomes (n = 4), and test duration (n = 2). These outcomes were rarely reported from the patient perspective and were measured using a range of standardized or validated and nonstandardized methods. CONCLUSIONS: We identified few PCOs incorporated in the AC. Our findings reflect the historical emphasis of diagnostic research on accuracy, clinical utility, and selected outcomes (eg, adverse events). As radiology moves to a more patient-centered approach, it will be important to measure PCOs reported directly from patients.

Lessons Learned From Two Decades of Patient- and Family-Centered Care in Radiology, Part 2: Building a Culture.

As reimbursements are increasingly linked to patient experience, physicians and hospitals will need to find ways to incorporate patient and family input into operational decisions. Rather than starting from the beginning, health systems could learn from practitioners who have been experimenting in this space and are willing to share their experience. The authors share lessons learned from two decades of experience incorporating patient and family advisers into the clinical operation of a radiology department and the resulting culture change. Radiology and radiologists can incorporate principles of patient- and family-centered care into clinical operations without loss of productivity.

Lessons Learned From Two Decades of Patient- and Family-Centered Care in Radiology, Part 1: Getting Started.

Patient- and family-centered care has a long history, but the application of these principles to radiology is limited by infrequent direct patient contact for many radiologists; scarce peer-reviewed data in the radiology literature; and sparse access to implementation strategies, tools, and best practices. In a series of two articles, the authors share two decades of lessons learned from implementing patient- and family-centered care in a radiology department.

Medical student radiology education: summary and recommendations from a national survey of medical school and radiology department leadership.

The ACR Task Force on Medical Student Education in Radiology, in partnership with the Alliance of Medical Student Educators in Radiology, investigated the current status of how and to what extent medical imaging was being taught in medical schools. The task force executed a 3-part survey of medical school deans, radiology department chairs, and intern physicians. The results provided an updated understanding of the status of radiology education in medical schools in the United States. This summary includes recommendations about how individual radiology departments and ACR members can assist in advancing the specialty of diagnostic radiology through medical student education.

White paper from the ACR Task Force on Print Media in Radiology.

The rapidly changing technological and business environment in which scientific journals are published will necessitate ongoing reassessment of operations, goals, and priorities. In this white paper, the ACR Task Force on Print Media in Radiology reviews the history and role of print media in radiology; discusses current and anticipated societal, technological, and financial challenges; and explores a variety of strategies to help ensure the relevance of professional society publishing in the future.