Radiology groups' workload in relative value units and factors affecting it

被引:40
作者
Sunshine, JH [1 ]
Burkhardt, JH [1 ]
机构
[1] Amer Coll Radiol, Dept Res, Reston, VA 20191 USA
关键词
radiology and radiologists; socioeconomic issues;
D O I
10.1148/radiology.214.3.r00mr50815
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
PURPOSE: To measure diagnostic radiology groups' workload in physician work relative value units (RVUs) and identify factors affecting it. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 1996 and 1997, the authors surveyed diagnostic radiology and radiation oncology groups regarding finances, workload, and basic characteristics. The study was based on approximately 100 diagnostic radiology groups. The authors analyzed the distribution of workload in different categories of groups, conducting multiple statistical analyses. RESULTS: The annual numbers of procedures were approximately 10%-15% lower than those in a comparison survey with a good response rate. The annual number of RVUs per full-time equivalent (FTE) diagnostic radiologist was highly variable in every group category, as was the number of RVUs per clinical work hour. Multivariate regression analysis indicated that variation in the annual number of hours worked did not explain variation in annual workload. RVUs per FTE radiologist were higher the greater the percentage of a group's workload from interventional, computed tomographic, and magnetic resonance imaging procedures. CONCLUSION: Given the likely response bias, the annual workload per FTE radiologist probably averaged approximately 4,000 RVUs in academic groups and approximately 6,000 in nonacademic groups, but the large, unexplained variance means the average values should not be taken as norms.
引用
收藏
页码:815 / 822
页数:8
相关论文
共 12 条
[1]   Characteristics of radiology groups and of diagnostic radiologists and radiation oncologists in different types of practices [J].
Chan, WC ;
Sunshine, JH ;
Kunkle, LM ;
Shaffer, KA .
RADIOLOGY, 1998, 207 (02) :443-453
[2]   PRODUCTIVITY OF RADIOLOGISTS - ESTIMATES BASED ON ANALYSIS OF RELATIVE VALUE UNITS [J].
CONOLEY, PM ;
VERNON, SW .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1991, 157 (06) :1337-1340
[3]  
CORTEGIANO MJ, 1999, RADIOL BUSINESS MANA, V34, P4
[4]  
CORTEGIANO MJ, 1998, RADIOLOGY BUSINESS M, V33, P4
[5]   Profile of US radiologists at mid-decade: Overview of findings from the 1995 survey of radiologists [J].
Deitch, CH ;
Chan, WC ;
Sunshine, JH ;
Shaffer, KA .
RADIOLOGY, 1997, 202 (01) :69-77
[6]  
*HLTH CAR FIN ADM, 1997, FED REGISTER, V211, P59048
[7]   THE RADIOLOGY RELATIVE VALUE SCALE - ITS DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLICATIONS [J].
MOOREFIELD, JM ;
MACEWAN, DW ;
SUNSHINE, JH .
RADIOLOGY, 1993, 187 (02) :317-326
[8]  
NETER J, 1985, REGRESSION ANAL VARI, P582
[9]   COMPARISON OF MEASURED AND PERCEIVED TIME VALUES FOR RADIOLOGISTS WORK - IMPACT ON RELATIVE VALUE SCALES [J].
STRAUB, WH ;
WOLFE, H .
RADIOLOGY, 1990, 174 (02) :557-560
[10]   US radiologists' workload in 1995-1996 and trends since 1991-1992 [J].
Sunshine, JH ;
Busheé, GR ;
Mallick, R .
RADIOLOGY, 1998, 208 (01) :19-24