什么是衡量放射学工作量的适当标准?研究数量还是图像数量?

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Christopher John Troupis, Richard Alexander Hyde Knight, Kenneth Kwok-Pan Lau
{"title":"什么是衡量放射学工作量的适当标准?研究数量还是图像数量?","authors":"Christopher John Troupis,&nbsp;Richard Alexander Hyde Knight,&nbsp;Kenneth Kwok-Pan Lau","doi":"10.1111/1754-9485.13713","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>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.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>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.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>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, <i>P</i>-value &lt; 0.0001).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The number of monthly images per radiologist increased substantially from 2009 to 2022, despite a relatively constant number of monthly studies per radiologist. Our study suggests that using the number of studies as an isolated fundamental data set underestimates the true radiologist's workload. We propose that the increased volume of images examined by individual radiologists may more appropriately reflect true work demand and may add more weight to future workforce planning.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","volume":"68 5","pages":"530-539"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1754-9485.13713","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What is the appropriate measure of radiology workload: Study or image numbers?\",\"authors\":\"Christopher John Troupis,&nbsp;Richard Alexander Hyde Knight,&nbsp;Kenneth Kwok-Pan Lau\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1754-9485.13713\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Introduction</h3>\\n \\n <p>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.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>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.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>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, <i>P</i>-value &lt; 0.0001).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>The number of monthly images per radiologist increased substantially from 2009 to 2022, despite a relatively constant number of monthly studies per radiologist. Our study suggests that using the number of studies as an isolated fundamental data set underestimates the true radiologist's workload. We propose that the increased volume of images examined by individual radiologists may more appropriately reflect true work demand and may add more weight to future workforce planning.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16218,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology\",\"volume\":\"68 5\",\"pages\":\"530-539\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1754-9485.13713\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1754-9485.13713\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1754-9485.13713","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:以往评估放射研究数量的研究很少考虑相应的图像数量。我们的目的是量化三级医疗保健网络中每位放射科医生的研究和图像数量的增长情况,以更好地了解对影像服务的需求:方法:使用图片存档和通信系统(PACS),获得了 2009 年 1 月至 2022 年 12 月期间澳大利亚墨尔本一家三级医疗保健网络的内部放射科医生报告的所有诊断研究的每项研究的图像数量。薪酬数据用于获取相当于全职放射医师的人数:在所有模式中,共有 4,462,702 项诊断研究和 1,116,311,209 张图像。在研究期间,每月检查次数从 17,235 次增加到 35,152 次(104%)。每月图像数量从 1,120,832 幅增加到 13,353,056 幅(1091%),其中计算机断层扫描(CT)的绝对增幅最大,达到每月 9,395,653 幅(1476%)。相当于每名全职放射科医生的每月检查次数没有增加,但每名放射科医生的每月图像切片数却增加了 399%,从 48,781 幅增至 243,518 幅(Kendall Tau 相关系数为 0.830,P 值为结论):从 2009 年到 2022 年,尽管每位放射科医生每月的检查次数相对稳定,但其每月图像数量却大幅增加。我们的研究表明,将研究数量作为一个孤立的基本数据集会低估放射科医生的真实工作量。我们建议,放射科医师个人检查图像数量的增加可能会更恰当地反映真实的工作需求,并为未来的劳动力规划增加更多砝码。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

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

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.

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 < 0.0001).

Conclusion

The number of monthly images per radiologist increased substantially from 2009 to 2022, despite a relatively constant number of monthly studies per radiologist. Our study suggests that using the number of studies as an isolated fundamental data set underestimates the true radiologist's workload. We propose that the increased volume of images examined by individual radiologists may more appropriately reflect true work demand and may add more weight to future workforce planning.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
133
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology (formerly Australasian Radiology) is the official journal of The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists, publishing articles of scientific excellence in radiology and radiation oncology. Manuscripts are judged on the basis of their contribution of original data and ideas or interpretation. All articles are peer reviewed.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信