Formal wellness training of academic radiology leaders improves work-life conflict.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of formal leadership training of academic radiology leaders within an academic center on their own burnout and professional fulfillment. METHODS: The study cohort was academic radiology leaders within one of the largest academic organizations of academic radiologists within the United States. All academic radiology leaders within the organization were electronically mailed a weblink to a confidential IRB-approved survey in April 2021. The survey included validated questions from the Stanford Professional Fulfillment Index (PFI), values alignment, teamwork, overload, and work-family conflict. Academic leaders were invited in May 2021 to participate in instructor-led formal training on leading wellness focusing on 5 core leadership skills - emotional intelligence, self-care, resilience support, demonstrating care, and managing burnout. An identical follow-up survey was electronically mailed 6 months after initial training in November 2021. RESULTS: The overall response rate of academic radiology leaders was 59% (19/32). For both measures, there was acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.63 for work exhaustion and α = 0.90 for fulfillment). There was a statistically significant improvement in work-family conflict (3.32 vs 2.86; p = 0.04). No statistically significant differences were identified for fulfillment, work exhaustion, alignment, work overload, and teamwork scores after training. CONCLUSION: Formal instruction in leading wellness improved work-life conflict for academic radiology leaders. There was no significant change in burnout, fulfillment nor organizational alignment of the leaders. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Formal instruction in leading wellness raised awareness and improved work-life conflict in academic radiology leaders.

Changes in the Radiology Practice Landscape and Indicators of Practice Consolidation From 2014 to 2023.

Background: A range of economic and health policy incentives are leading to ongoing consolidation among payers, hospitals, and physician practices. Objective: To evaluate consolidation among radiologists' affiliated practices through 2023, analyze the impact of consolidation on such practices' specialty mix and size, and assess radiologists' new affiliations after prior practices cease. Methods: CMS data from 2014 to 2023 were used to identify all radiologists nationally along with their affiliated practices. Practices were categorized based on the specialty mix of all affiliated physicians as radiology-only or multispecialty; multispecialty practices were further categorized as radiology-majority, other-specialty-majority,or no-majority-specialty. Practices that ceased (i.e., became absent within CMS data) were identified. Temporal shifts were assessed, to infer consolidation patterns. Results: From 2014 to 2023, the number of Medicare-enrolled radiologists increased 17.3% from 30,723 to 36,024, while their number of affiliated practices decreased 14.7% from 5059 to 4313. The number of radiology-only, radiology-majority, other-specialty-majority, and no-majority practices changed by -31.8% (3104 to 2118), 10.8% (402 to 446), -5.7% (615 to 580), and 24.6% (938 to 1169), respectively. The number of practices with 1-2, 3-9, 10-24, 25-49, 50-99, and ≥100 radiologists changed by -18.7% (2233 to 1815), -34.4% (1406 to 923), -25.2% (910 to 681), 33.2% (352 to 469), 121.6% (125 to 277), and 348.5% (33 to 148). A total of 3494 practices ceased, including 2281 radiology-only practices. Among 3854 radiologists for whom their only affiliation was a ceased radiology-only practice, their subsequent-year affiliation was a radiology-only practice in 54.3% and a multispecialty practice type in the remaining instances. Conclusions: An overall decrease in the number of radiology practices and concurrent growth in the number of radiologists was mirrored by shifts from small toward large practices and from radiology-only toward multispecialty practices, consistent with ongoing practice consolidation. While determining causes of consolidation were beyond this study's scope, the shifts may relate to economic incentives and legislative changes favoring large multispecialty practices. Clinical Impact: Radiologists' continued consolidation into large multispecialty practices may facilitate subspecialization and greater negotiating power in payor contracting. Yet radiologists may prefer smaller and/or radiology-only practices for autonomy and influence on practice structure.

Financial Viability of the No Surprises Act Independent Dispute Resolution Process: Radiology and Other Hospital-Based Specialties.

BACKGROUND. The federal No Surprises Act (NSA), designed to eliminate surprise medical billing for out-of-network (OON) care for circumstances beyond patients' control, established the independent dispute resolution (IDR) process to settle clinician-payer payment disputes for OON care. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to assess the fraction of OON claims for which radiologists and other hospital-based specialists can expect to at least break even when challenging payer-determined payments through the NSA IDR process, as a measure of the process's financial viability. METHODS. This retrospective study extracted claims from a national commercial database (Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart) for hospital-based specialties occurring on the same day as in-network emergency department (ED) visits or inpatient stays from January 2017 to December 2021. OON claims were identified. OON claims batching was simulated using IDR rules. Maximum potential recovered payments from the IDR process were estimated as the difference between the charges and the allowed amount. The percentages of claims for which the maximum potential payment and one-quarter of this amount (a more realistic payment recovery estimate) would exceed IDR fees were determined, using US$150 and US$450 fee thresholds to approximate the range of final 2024 IDR fees. These values represented the percentage of OON claims that would be financially viable candidates for IDR submission. RESULTS. Among 76,221,264 claims for hospital-based specialties associated with in-network ED visits or inpatient stays, 1,482,973 (1.9%) were OON. The maximum potential payment exceeded fee thresholds of US$150 and US$450 for 55.0% and 32.1%, respectively, of batched OON claims for radiologists and 76.8% and 61.3% of batched OON claims for all other hospital-based specialties combined. At payment of one-quarter of that amount, these values were 26.9% and 10.6%, respectively, for radiologists and 56.6% and 38.4% for all other hospital-based specialties combined. CONCLUSION. The IDR process would be financially unviable for a substantial fraction of OON claims for hospital-based specialists (more so for radiology than for other such specialties). CLINICAL IMPACT. Although the NSA enacted important patient protections, IDR fees limit clinicians' opportunities to dispute payer-determined payments and potentially undermine their bargaining power in contract negotiations. Therefore, IDR rulemaking may negatively impact patient access to in-network care.

Using Facebook Live to Advocate Breast Cancer Screening.

With current conflicting and confusing screening mammography guidelines between major medical organizations, radiologists have an opportunity to educate and advocate for patients using the power of social media. The authors provide a brief overview on the impact of social media in radiology, in particular Facebook, as well as challenges encountered by radiologists as they establish an online presence, and how to effectively use Facebook Live to advocate for screening mammography.

Exploring the Negative Likelihood Ratio and How It Can Be Used to Minimize False-Positives in Breast Imaging.

OBJECTIVE: This article describes the definition and proposed utilization of negative likelihood ratios (NLRs) as statistical parameters in breast imaging. Examples with calculations are provided using BI-RADS category 4 subcategories. CONCLUSION: By auditing individual performance early and often against American College of Radiology benchmark positive predictive value ranges for the BI-RADS category 4 subcategories, and by fully understanding NLRs and their application in breast imaging, radiologists can minimize false-positive findings and unnecessary biopsies.

Comparison of Utilization of the Family and Medical Leave Act in Radiology Practices Between 2015 and 2016.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to assess utilization of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) in radiology practices in 2016 and compare with 2015 utilization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Practice of Radiology Environment Database was used to identify practice leaders, and these leaders were asked to complete the annual American College of Radiology Commission on Human Resources workforce survey. The 2017 survey, which asked about 2016 experiences, again included questions about the number of radiologists in each practice who took FMLA, reasons why, and how absences were covered. RESULTS: Twenty-six percent (477/1811) of practice leaders responded to the survey. Of these respondents, 73% (346/477) answered FMLA questions, and 23% (80/346) of those answered affirmatively that a radiologist in their practice had taken FMLA leave in 2016 (previously 15% in 2015; p = 0.15). The reasons for FMLA leave included taking care of a newborn or adopted child (57%, previously 49%; p = 0.26), personal serious health condition (35%, previously 42%; p = 0.31), caring for an immediate family member (8%, unchanged), and engaging in active military duty (< 1%, unchanged). Although more women (72%) than men (32%) took FMLA leave for the first reason (p < 0.01), more men (63%) than women (18%) took FMLA leave for the second (p < 0.01), and there was no significant difference between women (10%) and men (5%) taking leave to care for an immediate family member (p = 0.18). Most practices (80%) again made no workforce changes to cover absences due to FMLA leave (previously 82%). CONCLUSION: Utilization of FMLA leave in radiology practices in 2016 was similar to that in 2015 and represents the beginning of longitudinal accrual of data on this important topic for both male and female radiologists.

Potential Radiation-Related Effects on Radiologists.

OBJECTIVE: The risk of injury associated with long-term occupational exposure to ionizing radiation is low for radiologists. The purpose of this article is to systematically review and inform radiologists about radiation-related effects to which they are potentially susceptible. CONCLUSION: Formal education and training on radiation safety and management, careful attention to good radiation protection habits, and continued emphasis on radiation management and the as low as reasonably achievable principle are recommended for all radiologists.

Breast Imaging: A Paradigm for Accountable Care Organizations.

OBJECTIVE: Accountable care organizations (ACOs) are being promoted by the Centers of Medicare Services as alternative payment models for radiology reimbursement. Because of its clinical orientation, focus on prevention, standardized reporting, quality orientation through mandatory accreditation, and value demonstration through established outcome metrics, breast imaging offers a unique paradigm for the ACO model in radiology. CONCLUSION: In radiology, breast imaging represents the paradigm for ACOs.

Criteria for identifying radiologists with acceptable screening mammography interpretive performance on basis of multiple performance measures.

OBJECTIVE: Using a combination of performance measures, we updated previously proposed criteria for identifying physicians whose performance interpreting screening mammography may indicate suboptimal interpretation skills. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, six expert breast imagers used a method based on the Angoff approach to update criteria for acceptable mammography performance on the basis of two sets of combined performance measures: set 1, sensitivity and specificity for facilities with complete capture of false-negative cancers; and set 2, cancer detection rate (CDR), recall rate, and positive predictive value of a recall (PPV1) for facilities that cannot capture false-negative cancers but have reliable cancer follow-up information for positive mammography results. Decisions were informed by normative data from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC). RESULTS: Updated combined ranges for acceptable sensitivity and specificity of screening mammography are sensitivity≥80% and specificity≥85% or sensitivity 75-79% and specificity 88-97%. Updated ranges for CDR, recall rate, and PPV1 are: CDR≥6 per 1000, recall rate 3-20%, and any PPV1; CDR 4-6 per 1000, recall rate 3-15%, and PPV1≥3%; or CDR 2.5-4.0 per 1000, recall rate 5-12%, and PPV1 3-8%. Using the original criteria, 51% of BCSC radiologists had acceptable sensitivity and specificity; 40% had acceptable CDR, recall rate, and PPV1. Using the combined criteria, 69% had acceptable sensitivity and specificity and 62% had acceptable CDR, recall rate, and PPV1. CONCLUSION: The combined criteria improve previous criteria by considering the interrelationships of multiple performance measures and broaden the acceptable performance ranges compared with previous criteria based on individual measures.

Practical Strategies to Retain Radiologists.

Since the great resignation associated with the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, radiology practices are now challenged with maintaining adequate radiology staffing requirements to cope with increasing clinical workload requirements. The authors describe practical strategies for radiology practice leaders to retain radiologists in the current challenging job market, while mitigating their burnout.

Should I Stay, or Should I Go? Early Phase Instrument Development of Workforce Movement-A Pilot Study with Breast Radiologists.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to develop a psychometrically valid survey on workplace satisfaction and examine predictors of workforce movement among breast radiologists. METHODS: Actively practicing members of the Society of Breast Imaging were invited to complete a survey on workplace satisfaction. Radiologists also indicated whether they had recently left their practice or were thinking of leaving their practice. RESULTS: In total, 228 breast radiologists provided valid responses (8.7% response rate); 45% were thinking of leaving or had left their practice. Factor analysis yielded five factors, and discriminant function analysis found six main aspects associated with workforce movement in breast radiologists: (1) not enough work-life balance; (2) salary too low; (3) not feeling valued; (4) wanting a different challenge and/or more growth opportunity; (5) safety concerns; and (6) not feeling respected by physician leadership. CONCLUSIONS: Pending further validation in larger and different cohorts, the survey created here can be administered by radiology practices to predict when breast radiologists are vulnerable to quitting. Atlhough this measure was designed for breast radiologists specifically, it could be adapted for other subspecialties.

The 2021 ACR/RBMA Workforce Survey: Practice Types, Employment Trends, and Hiring Needs.

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.

Radiologists' Out-of-Network Billing Trends, 2007 to 2021.

PURPOSE: Given the financial hardships of surprise billing for patients, the aim of this study was to assess the degree to which radiologists effectively participate in commercial insurance networks by examining the trend in the share of radiologists' imaging claims that are out of network (OON). METHODS: A retrospective study over a 15-year period (2007-2021) was conducted using claims from Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart Database to assess the share of radiologists' imaging claims that are OON. Radiologists' annual OON rate was assessed overall as well as for claims associated with inpatient stays and emergency department (ED) visits. Rates were assessed for all imaging studies as well as by modality. Linear regression was conducted to assess OON rate time trends. RESULTS: From 2007 to 2021, 5,039,142 of radiologists' imaging claims (6.3%) were OON. This rate declined from 12.6% in 2007 to 1.1% in 2021. Over the study period, the OON rate was 5.0% during an inpatient stay and 2.1% on the same day as an ED visit that did not lead to an inpatient admission. The linear trend in the overall OON rate declined 0.74 percentage points annually (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.90 to -0.58 percentage points) over the study period. Likewise, the annual declines were 0.54 percentage points (95% CI, -0.71 to -0.36) and 0.26 percentage points (95% CI, -0.33 to -0.20 percentage points) for imaging claims associated with inpatient stays and ED visits, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Radiologists' imaging claims that are OON has significantly declined from 2007 to a minimal level in 2021. This may indicate effective negotiations between radiologists and commercial payers and new state-level surprise billing laws.

Breast Radiologists' Perceptions on the Detection and Management of Invasive Lobular Carcinoma: Most Agree Imaging Beyond Mammography Is Warranted.

OBJECTIVE: To determine breast radiologists' confidence in detecting invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) on mammography and the perceived need for additional imaging in screening and preoperative settings. METHODS: A 16-item anonymized survey was developed, and IRB exemption obtained, by the Society of Breast Imaging (SBI) Patient Care and Delivery Committee and the Lobular Breast Cancer Alliance. The survey was emailed to 2946 radiologist SBI members on February 15, 2023. The survey recorded demographics, perceived modality-specific sensitivity for ILC to the nearest decile, and opinions on diagnosing ILC in screening and staging imaging. Five-point Likert scales were used (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree). RESULTS: Response rate was 12.4% (366/2946). Perceived median (interquartile range) modality-specific sensitivities for ILC were MRI 90% (80-90), contrast-enhanced mammography 80% (70-90), molecular breast imaging 80% (60-90), digital breast tomosynthesis 70% (60-80), US 60% (50-80), and 2D mammography 50% (30-60). Only 25% (85/340) respondents were confident in detecting ILC on screening mammography in dense breasts, while 67% (229/343) were confident if breasts were nondense. Most agreed that supplemental screening is needed to detect ILC in women with dense breasts (272/344, 79%) or a personal history of ILC (248/341, 73%), with 34% (118/334) indicating that supplemental screening would also benefit women with nondense breasts. Most agreed that additional imaging is needed to evaluate extent of disease in women with newly diagnosed ILC, regardless of breast density (dense 320/329, 97%; nondense 263/329, 80%). CONCLUSION: Most breast radiologists felt that additional imaging beyond mammography is needed to more confidently screen for and stage ILC.

Factors Contributing to Disproportionate Burnout in Women Breast Imaging Radiologists: A Review.

Physician burnout continues to increase in prevalence and disproportionately affects women physicians. Breast imaging is a woman-dominated subspeciality, and therefore, worsening burnout among women physicians may have significant repercussions on the future of the breast imaging profession. Systemic and organizational factors have been shown to be the greatest contributors to burnout beyond individual factors. Based on the Mayo Model, we review the evidence regarding the 7 major organizational contributors to physician burnout and their potential disproportionate impacts on women breast radiologists. The major organizational factors discussed are work-life integration, control and flexibility, workload and job demands, efficiency and resources, finding meaning in work, social support and community at work, and organizational culture and values. We also propose potential strategies for institutions and practices to mitigate burnout in women breast imaging radiologists. Many of these strategies could also benefit men breast imaging radiologists, who are at risk for burnout as well.

Leadership: Causing and Curing Burnout in Radiology.

Burnout in US radiology has reached crisis proportions. Leaders play critical roles in both causing and preventing burnout. This article will review the current state of the crisis and how leaders can work to stop causing burnout as well as developing proactive strategies for preventing and mitigating burnout.

A pre-post study of stressors and burnout affecting breast radiologists before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Rationale and objective: To compare burnout and stressors of breast radiologists prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and methods: Members of the Society of Breast Imaging were emailed an IRB-approved survey in January 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic. Survey included questions from the Maslach Burnout Inventory and specific stressors including work pace, work-life balance, care of dependents, and financial strain. Data were compared to previous surveys prior to the pandemic. Results: The response rate was 25% (261/1061) for those who opened the email. Of the respondents, 74% (194/261) were female, 82% (214/261) were white, 73% (191/261) were full time, 71% (185/261) were fellowship trained, 41% (106/261) had more than 20 years of experience, and 30% (79/261) were in academic practice.Respondents in 2021 reported frequent levels of depersonalization (2.2) and emotional exhaustion (3.4) while reporting frequent levels of personal accomplishment (5.3), a protective factor. These values were nearly identical before the pandemic in 2020: (2.2, 3.5, 5.3, respectively, p = .9). Respondents rated practicing faster than they would like as the highest stressor; however, 5 of the 6 stressors improved after the pandemic onset (p < .05). Conversely, participants perceived these stresses had gotten slightly worse since the pandemic (p < .01). Almost 50% of respondents reported they were considering leaving their practice; the most common reason was work/life balance. Conclusion: Burnout in breast radiologists remains frequent but unchanged during the COVID-19 pandemic. While participants perceived that some stressors were worse during the pandemic, there was slight improvement in most stressors between the pre-pandemic and pandemic cohorts.

How breast radiologists can deal with the disruptive technologist.

Physician burnout continues to be a challenge in addressing radiologist wellness. The stressors contributing to breast radiologist burnout are distinctive due to the unique work environments of a breast center. The intimate nature of a subspecialized team of radiologist(s) and technologists at an imaging center may result in interpersonal challenges such as a disruptive technologist. It is important to address the stressors to mitigate the increasing burnout affecting breast radiologists. This article raises awareness among radiologists and administrators and provides strategies to breast centers and breast radiologists for guidance on dealing with a disruptive technologist.

Prevalence of Burnout of Radiologists in Private Practice.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence and demographic factors associated with both burnout and fulfillment of private practice radiologists within the largest coalition of independent wholly physician-owned diagnostic radiology practices within the United States. METHODS: The study cohort included practicing radiologists within the largest coalition of wholly radiologist-owned, independently practicing diagnostic radiology groups within the United States. Practicing radiologists within all 31 radiology private practices within the organization were electronically mailed a web link to a confidential institutional review board-approved survey in August and September 2021. The survey included validated questions from the Stanford Professional Fulfillment Index, individual and practice demographics, and self-care. Radiologists were classified as being burned out and professionally fulfilled on the basis of established cutoffs from the Professional Fulfillment Index. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 20.6% (254 of 1,235). The overall rate of radiologist burnout was 46% (Cronbach's α = 0.92), and professional fulfillment was 26.7% (Cronbach's α = 0.91). The inverse association between professional fulfillment and burnout was highly significant (r = -0.66, P < .0001) on the basis of average scores. Radiologists who took call (evenings, overnight, and weekends) were statistically most likely to be burned out. Older radiologists were less likely to experience burnout. Factors statistically significantly associated with professional fulfillment were eating nutritious meals and exercising at least four times per week. No statistically significant association was seen between either burnout or fulfillment with gender, ethnicity, practice geography, or practice size. CONCLUSIONS: In the largest coalition of independent wholly physician-owned diagnostic radiology practices across the United States, about one-half of radiologists were burned out, and just over one-quarter were professionally fulfilled. Taking call was significantly associated with radiologist burnout. Self-care habits were associated with professional fulfillment.