What is the appropriate measure of radiology workload: Study or image numbers?

Introduction Previous studies assessing the volume of radiological studies rarely considered the corresponding number of images. We aimed to quantify the increases in study and image numbers per radiologist in a tertiary healthcare network to better understand the demands on imaging services. Method...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology 2024-08, Vol.68 (5), p.530-539
Main Authors: Troupis, Christopher John, Knight, Richard Alexander Hyde, Lau, Kenneth Kwok‐Pan
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Australia
burnout
Communications systems
Computed tomography
Correlation coefficients
Diagnostic Imaging
Diagnostic systems
Equivalence
Health care
Humans
Medical imaging
picture archiving and communication system
productivity
radiology
Radiology Department, Hospital
Radiology Information Systems
Victoria
Workload
Workloads
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Introduction Previous studies assessing the volume of radiological studies rarely considered the corresponding number of images. We aimed to quantify the increases in study and image numbers per radiologist in a tertiary healthcare network to better understand the demands on imaging services. Methods Using the Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS), the number of images per study was obtained for all diagnostic studies reported by in‐house radiologists at a tertiary healthcare network in Melbourne, Australia, between January 2009 and December 2022. Payroll data was used to obtain the numbers of full‐time equivalent radiologists. Results Across all modalities, there were 4,462,702 diagnostic studies and 1,116,311,209 images. The number of monthly studies increased from 17,235 to 35,152 (104%) over the study period. The number of monthly images increased from 1,120,832 to 13,353,056 (1091%), with computed tomography (CT) showing the greatest absolute increase of 9,395,653 images per month (1476%). There was no increase in the monthly studies per full‐time equivalent radiologist; however, the number of monthly image slices per radiologist increased 399%, from 48,781 to 243,518 (Kendall Tau correlation coefficient 0.830, P‐value 
ISSN:1754-9477
1754-9485
1754-9485
DOI:10.1111/1754-9485.13713