Purpose
Medical imaging is a rapidly evolving medical speciality.
Advances in Medical Imaging technologies are facilitating an expanded scope for radiologists in the diagnosis,
monitoring and treatment of disease.
Both the volume and complexity of imaging examinations being performed are increasing.
(1,
2) New approaches to radiology workforce modelling are required to accommodate the increased Radiology workload associated with the proliferation of cross-sectional imaging,
radiological-guided procedures,
multidisciplinary team meeting and education and training requirements.
(3,
4)
The quantification of radiology workload in tertiary hospital centres is...
Methods and materials
Radiologist workload-workforce calculations have been performed on the 2014-15 FY data in an attempt to assess the productivity of the GCHHS radiology workforce using a variety of ways to assess reasonable throughput.
The 2014-15 FY activity data was then extrapolated in line with demand projections to forecast 2015-16FY workforce requirements.
Workload and workforce calculations have been performed using:
I.
Exam count method: the values have been adopted from the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologist (RANZCR) training site accreditation recommendation.
(5) and the...
Results
There is high variability in the calculated radiologist full-time equivalent (FTE) requirements using exam count,
RVU versus RT methods.
The 2014-15 FY workforce assessment indicated 12.06 to 22.38 FTE radiologist is needed to meet the inhouse reporting workload with radiologists responsible for an average of 7523 exam per FTE, 76,580 RVU per FTE or 81.1% of time in reporting activities.
With a low proportion of plain films (32.6%) and a high concentration of complex examinations in the reporting case mix,
only one radiologist out of...
Conclusion
RVU and RT models can take into account case complexity and may be more appropriate for workload and workforce calculations.
Collection of workforce data from modell institutions would be helpful for interinstitutional benchmarking.
Exam count should not to be use for in-depth radiologist performance assessment and if applied due to convenience,
it should only be applied with traditional case mix with a high proportion of plain films and an understanding of its limitation.
In addition improvements in efficiency do not necessarily translate to an equal...
References
1.
McDonald RJ,
Schwartz KM,
Eckel LJ,
Diehn FE,
Hunt CH,
Bartholmai BJ,
et al.
The Effects of Changes in Utilization and Technological Advancements of Cross-Sectional Imaging on Radiologist Workload.
Academic radiology.
2015;22(9):1191-8.
2.
Medical Benefits Reviews Task Group.
Review of Funding for Diagnostic Imaging Services: FINAL REPORT.
Australia: Department of Health and Ageing: Diagnostic Imaging Review Team,
2011.
3.
Bhargavan M,
Kaye AH,
Forman HP,
Sunshine JH.
Workload of Radiologists in United States in 2006–2007 and Trends Since 1991–1992 1.
Radiology.
2009;252(2):458-67.
4.
MacDonald...