Interventionalists’ Perceptions on Interventional Radiology as a Clinically-Oriented Specialty

Wednesday, April 2, 2025

11:06 AM – 11:15 AM CT

Location: Music City Center, 205 BC

Presenting Author(s)

Rahul Mal, MD

Resident
Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, United States

Author/Co-author(s)

Jeffrey Forris Beecham Chick, MD, MPH

Professor of Clinical Radiology
Keck School of Medicine of University of Southern California, United States
DS

David S. Shin, MD

Associate Professor
University of Southern California, United States
SC

Seetharam Chadalavada, MD, FSIR, MS

Vice Chair of Radiology, Associate Professor Radiology & Surgery
University of Cincinnati | UC Health, United States
Mina S. Makary, MD (he/him/his)

Interventional Radiologist
The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, United States

Purpose: Clinically-oriented Interventional Radiology (IR) is defined by its emphasis on patient-centered services such as inpatient rounding, patient follow-up, periprocedural involvement, and patient-physician relationships. This survey-based study aims to evaluate current perceptions of a clinically-oriented practice model, assess its impact on patient care, and explore aspirations for the future direction of the specialty.

Materials and Methods: IR attendings and residents were surveyed using the Qualtrics survey platform (Qualtrics, Provo, UT). The survey consisted of 35 questions, including both Likert Scale multiple choice questions and a free text question for additional opinions. Topics covered include the background of current practice or training program, perceptions on practicing clinical IR, the impact of the clinical IR model on patient care, and the financial effect of practicing clinical IR.

Results: A total of 225 IR attendings and residents completed the survey. Majority of respondents not only stated that a clinical IR model would definitely or somewhat improve patient outcomes but would also improve patient satisfaction, totaling 91% (n=205) and 90% (n=202) respectively. For interventionalists, 89% (n=200) stated that clinical IR would improve their career satisfaction. Over half of respondents indicated that they would ideally only practice IR without diagnostic responsibilities (n=124). Similarly, 59% (n=132) of respondents voiced it is necessary or somewhat necessary for IR to separate from DR for delivering the best patient outcomes. Most of the respondents stated that a clinical IR model will somewhat or definitely increase referrals and revenue, totaling 86% (n=194) and 60% (n=134) respectively. Over half of the respondents (n=118) believed that IR cannot succeed in turf wars without a clinically-oriented IR practice, with 82% (n=184) stating that clinically-oriented IR is very important for the future of the specialty.

Conclusion: IR practiced as a clinically-oriented specialty may offer benefits such as improving patient outcomes, patient satisfaction, physician career satisfaction, and a robust referral base.