The Society of Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology. Future directions in vascular and interventional radiology research

Mentorship in Interventional Radiology: Addressing Obstacles to Pursuing Research and Innovation Among IR Trainees

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

To ascertain the perceived obstacles that medical students and Interventional Radiology (IR) residents face performing IR research during training and incorporating research into their future careers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was reviewed and exempt from Institutional Review Board review. Participants' attitudes and perceived barriers toward performing IR research, and experience with mentorship in IR were assessed using a 27-item survey sent to all members of the Society of Interventional Radiology Resident, Fellow and Student (SIR-RFS, n = 445), and Medical Student Council (SIR-MSC, n = 267) sections between July and September 2020. Descriptive statistics were computed for all assessed categorical variables. Fisher's exact tests were performed to measure the significance of association between categorical variables.

RESULTS

Of the 712 students and residents surveyed, 151 (∼21%) responded. Of respondents, 100% reported that conducting research is important to advancing the field of IR. The highest ranked factors and obstacles to performing IR research were increased clinical demands (67.9%), lack of time (46.2%), lack of institutional support (41.5%), and lack of research experience (35.8%). Interestingly, those with a mentor were more likely to report an interest in pursuing a career in IR compared to those without a mentor (98.6% vs 41.0%, p < 0.0001). Furthermore, those with a mentor were more likely to report an interest in pursuing IR research compared to those without a mentor (32.5% vs 14.4%, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

There are many obstacles to performing IR research. Strong mentorship is an avenue to address these deterrents. The deployment of mentorship programs in IR is needed to ensure trainees can overcome the barriers outlined in this study and successfully pursue research careers in IR.

Interventional radiology: a half century of innovation

The evolution of modern interventional radiology began over half century ago with a simple question. Was it possible to use the same diagnostic imaging tools that had revolutionized the practice of medicine to guide the real-time treatment of disease? This disruptive concept led to rapid treatment advances in every organ system of the body. It became clear that by utilizing imaging some patients could undergo targeted procedures, eliminating the need for major surgery, while others could undergo procedures for previously unsolvable problems. The breadth of these changes now encompasses all of medicine and has forever changed the way we think about disease. In this brief review article, major advances in the field, as chronicled in the pages of Radiology, will be described.

Reimbursement trends for outpatient interventional radiology procedures: comparison of hospital and freestanding physician office sites of service

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare trends in reimbursement rates between hospital outpatient departments and freestanding physician offices for commonly performed interventional radiology procedures from 2006 through 2010.

METHODS

Using final rules data from the 2006 and 2008 Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System for Medicare and Medicare Physician Fee Schedule, reimbursement rates were calculated for a sample of procedures commonly performed by interventional radiologists in the outpatient setting. Hospital and freestanding reimbursement rates for 2006, 2008, and 2010 (projected) were adjusted for inflation to 2008 dollars and weighted by relative procedure frequency using Medicare Part B claims data. Reimbursements for the entire sample of procedures were compared year to year, by site of service, and by payment system. Individual procedure reimbursements were also trended.

RESULTS

In 2006, reimbursements for the entire procedure sample were 6% less in hospital outpatient departments than in freestanding offices. In 2008 and 2010, they are projected to be 3% and 23% greater, respectively, in hospital outpatient departments than in freestanding offices. Over the 4-year interval, reimbursements are projected to fall by 36% in freestanding offices and by 16% in hospital outpatient departments. Reimbursements to hospitals for facility costs are projected to decrease by 14%. Reimbursements to physicians for work done in hospital outpatient departments are projected to decrease by 23%.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial reductions in calculated outpatient interventional radiology practice expenses being phased in between 2006 and 2010 under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule seem to be dramatically reducing reimbursements for interventional procedures performed on outpatients, especially in freestanding offices. The impact of these practice expense reductions on interventional radiology seems to far outweigh that of the Deficit Reduction Act and other recent Medicare reimbursement changes.