Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To characterize the experiences of matched applicants (MAs) and program directors (PDs) in the 2022 interventional radiology (IR) residency Match and compare with 2017 data. METHODS:Surveys were distributed to IR PDs and MAs from the 2022 Match. Findings were compared with those of 2017 using the 2-sample t test and Fisher exact test. RESULTS:In total, 68 MAs (40%) and 47 PDs (52%) responded. Collected demographic traits were similar, including ongoing male predominance (77% of MAs, 83% of PDs). Moreover, 86% of MAs and 87% of PDs were "satisfied" with Match outcomes. Compared with those in 2017, MAs applied to more IR programs (P < .001). MAs reported more research (P = .003) and abstracts/publications (P < .001) and ranked these as more important than PDs did (P < .001 for both). Approximately 82% of PDs gave special attention to candidates who completed a visiting rotation at their institution; 60% of MAs and 95% of PDs believed virtual interviews resulted in overinterviewing (P < .001); both agreed they provided convenience and accessibility. Furthermore, 63% of MAs believed a Step 1 pass/fail system will be less equitable for applicants. Additional data on demographics, medical school experiences, applications, interviews, intern year, and rank process were reported. CONCLUSIONS:Satisfaction with Match results remained high from 2017 to 2022, although efforts are needed to improve applicants' ability to navigate the application process, address overapplying, and evaluate concerns regarding the Step 1 pass/fail system. These survey findings will help inform applicants and PDs for future match cycles.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Departmental websites are often the first exposure applicants have in researching programs. Websites provide information about resident education as well as infrastructure for resident wellness. For this study, we reviewed residency websites to evaluate resident wellness initiatives and extent of details available online. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:Program websites for diagnostic radiology residencies listed in the 2020 ERAS program list were evaluated for 26 criteria pertaining to resident wellness. Criteria which are not radiology resident specific were also evaluated on their graduate medical education (GME) websites if unavailable on the departmental website. RESULTS:Of 189 programs, 185 (97.9%) had functioning websites for review. Book funds were mentioned by 57% (mean $3,762), and 43.5% discussed housing stipends during AIRP (mean $2,204); neither significantly correlated with program size. Retirement plan matching was present for 47.8% of programs. Almost all programs utilized night float call schedules, with relatively similar distribution of residents starting on-call duties as fall PGY2s, spring PGY2s, and starting PGY3s. Moonlighting was mentioned by 22.8% of departments. Paid wellness days were discussed in 10.8% (mean 3.1 days/year), and 37.7% described paid parental leave (mean 27.8 days/year). Less than 10% described resident mentoring, wellness committees, or non-clinical curricula. Resident retreats were mentioned by 21.6% of programs, and 11.4% described regular social activities; both were found more frequently at larger programs (chi-square analysis, p <0.00625). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This study evaluated radiology residency program and GME websites for information pertaining to resident wellness. While financial and clinical information was typically present for >50% of programs, information regarding social initiatives was generally lacking and may be one area to bolster resident wellness and describe on websites.

OBJECTIVE:To develop and pilot test a patient decision aid (DA) describing small kidney masses and risks and benefits of treatment for the masses. METHODS:An expert committee iteratively designed a small kidney mass DA, incorporating evidence-based risk communication and informational needs for treatment options and shared decision making. After literature review and drafting content with the feedback of urologists, radiologists, and an internist, a rapid qualitative assessment was conducted using two patient focus groups to inform user-centered design. In a pilot study, 30 patients were randomized at the initial urologic consultation to receive the DA or existing institutional patient educational material (PEM). Preconsultation questionnaires captured patient knowledge and shared decision-making preferences. After review of the DA and subsequent clinician consultation, patients completed questionnaires on discussion content and satisfaction. Proportions between arms were compared using Fisher exact tests, and decision measures were compared using Mann-Whitney tests. RESULTS:Patient informational needs included risk of tumor growth during active surveillance and ablation, significance of comorbidities, and posttreatment recovery. For the DA, 84% of patients viewed all content, and mean viewing time was 20 min. Significant improvements in knowledge about small mass risks and treatments were observed (mean total scores: 52.6% DA versus 22.3% PEM, P < .001). DA use also increased the proportion of patients discussing ablation (66.7% DA versus 18.2% PEM, P = .02). Decision satisfaction measures were similar in both arms. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:Patients receiving a small kidney mass DA are likely to gain knowledge and preparedness to discuss all treatment options over standard educational materials.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The COVID-19 pandemic has transformed radiology recruitment into a virtual affair and placed an even stronger emphasis on the importance of departmental websites. In this study, we evaluate residency websites in detailing the response to COVID-19 as well as initiatives which help describe the resident experience. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:Program websites for diagnostic radiology residencies listed in the 2022 Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) program list were evaluated for 31 criteria related to departmental response to COVID-19, online outreach, and resident wellness. RESULTS:Of 184 programs, 182 had functioning websites for review. One program was excluded from analysis as the website was almost entirely video-based. In response to COVID-19, ≤1% described resident redeployment, vaccination information, departmental response to ABR Core Exam changes, or regular administration updates. Six (3.3%) described revised read-out protocols, four (2.2%) mentioned supplementary non-clinical education, and 14 (7.7%) indicated changes to educational conferences. The majority of websites (122, 67.4%) offered an informational or tour video, while 44 (24.3%) described expectations for virtual interviewing, and 20 (11.0%) had virtual "open-houses." Departmental social media, primarily Twitter, was linked for 60 (33.1%) programs. A total of 134 (74.0%) websites described community highlights. More than a quarter mentioned meal stipends (72, 39.8%), paid sick time (54, 29.8%) and healthcare resources (57, 31.5%). Although social activities were described by 44 (24.3%) programs, some specifically indicating changes to COVID-19, formal resident mentoring (25, 13.8%) and wellness committees (28, 15.5%) were less common. These criteria were found more commonly at the largest third of residency programs (chi square, p < 0.00625). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Programs rarely described work flow changes to COVID-19, and websites could improve in virtual outreach. Compared with prior literature, departmental websites have improved in describing wellness initiatives and related measures.

RATIONAL AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Radiology has one of the lowest female representation rates in medicine and recruiting female residents is a challenge for some residency programs. There is limited understanding of gender differences among residency applicants during program selection. The study objective is to investigate which program factors were considered most important by radiology residency applicants and to assess for differences by gender, race and ethnicity. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:An anonymous survey was distributed electronically to diagnostic and interventional radiology residency programs in the US and Canada via the Association of Program Coordinators in Radiology (APCR). Residents were asked to evaluate the importance of 30 factors during evaluation of residency programs using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not important, 5 = extremely important). RESULTS:370 residents and 1 fellow completed the survey. Of the respondents, 269 were male (72.5%) and 101 were female (27.2%). The most important factors to respondents during program selection were program culture (4.42), geographic location (4.17), fellowship placement (4.14), and imaging and/or procedure volume (3.98). There was a significant difference between male and female respondents in the importance of program culture (p = 0.002), composition of current residents (p = 0.007), percentage of current female residents (p < 0.0001), program size (p = 0.047), call schedule (p = 0.025), percentage of female faculty (p < 0.0001), faculty ethnic and racial diversity (p < 0.0001), resident ethnic and racial diversity (p < 0.0001), which female respondents ranked more highly. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Applicants consider many factors during residency program selection. Program culture, geographic location, fellowship placement and imaging and/or procedural volume were most important. There were significant differences by gender, race and ethnicity in importance of several factors.

Physicians, including radiologists and specifically breast imagers, face many challenges, and stressors during their daily routine, many of which can contribute to burnout. While there is an increasing body of literature evaluating burnout, including its prevalence in and impact on radiologists, there is a relative lack of information specifically addressing this topic as it relates to breast imaging. This article reviews key concepts in burnout, describes the potential impact on physicians at all levels of training and work, highlights unique aspects to the specialty of breast imaging that may contribute to burnout, and suggests tool and/or strategies that may help to combat and prevent burnout among breast imagers.

OBJECTIVE:As of June 30, 2020, interventional radiology (IR) fellowships will cease to exist and will be replaced by the integrated IR, independent IR, and early specialization in IR (ESIR) pathways. The objective of this study is to determine the alignment in the number of available positions between the ESIR and independent IR pathways. METHODS:An analysis was performed of 150 residency programs offering at least 1 of the 3 IR training pathways. Information regarding the most up-to-date list for integrated IR, independent IR, ESIR, and IR fellowship programs were obtained from the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR), the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS), and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) websites. A 4-question survey was distributed to residency program directors and residency program coordinators to confirm the number of positions offered in each of the training pathways at their institution. RESULTS:Ninety-nine of 113 ESIR programs (87.6% response rate) reported a total of 176 approved ESIR positions. One hundred and eleven fellowship programs in the United States currently offer a total of 331 positions. Seventy-seven integrated IR programs and 48 independent IR programs offer 150 and 133 positions, respectively, for a total of 283 advanced IR training positions. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:A substantial discrepancy currently exists with IR training pathways, as the number of available ESIR positions far outnumbers the available independent IR pathway positions. There is a continuing need for communication with residency programs and frequent reevaluation of the various IR training pathways to maintain the most accurate database.