Cargando…

Diagnostic radiology and its future: what do clinicians need and think?

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the view of clinicians on diagnostic radiology and its future. METHODS: Corresponding authors who published in the New England Journal of Medicine and the Lancet between 2010 and 2022 were asked to participate in a survey about diagnostic radiology and its future. RESULTS:...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kwee, Thomas C., Almaghrabi, Maan T., Kwee, Robert M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10667510/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37436504
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-09897-2
_version_ 1785139265959624704
author Kwee, Thomas C.
Almaghrabi, Maan T.
Kwee, Robert M.
author_facet Kwee, Thomas C.
Almaghrabi, Maan T.
Kwee, Robert M.
author_sort Kwee, Thomas C.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To investigate the view of clinicians on diagnostic radiology and its future. METHODS: Corresponding authors who published in the New England Journal of Medicine and the Lancet between 2010 and 2022 were asked to participate in a survey about diagnostic radiology and its future. RESULTS: The 331 participating clinicians gave a median score of 9 on a 0–10 point scale to the value of medical imaging in improving patient-relevant outcomes. 40.6%, 15.1%, 18.9%, and 9.5% of clinicians indicated to interpret more than half of radiography, ultrasonography, CT, and MRI examinations completely by themselves, without consulting a radiologist or reading the radiology report. Two hundred eighty-nine clinicians (87.3%) expected an increase in medical imaging utilization in the coming 10 years, whereas 9 clinicians (2.7%) expected a decrease. The need for diagnostic radiologists in the coming 10 years was expected to increase by 162 clinicians (48.9%), to remain stable by 85 clinicians (25.7%), and to decrease by 47 clinicians (14.2%). Two hundred clinicians (60.4%) expected that artificial intelligence (AI) will not make diagnostic radiologists redundant in the coming 10 years, whereas 54 clinicians (16.3%) thought the opposite. CONCLUSION: Clinicians who published in the New England Journal of Medicine or the Lancet attribute high value to medical imaging. They generally need radiologists for cross-sectional imaging interpretation, but for a considerable proportion of radiographs, their service is not required. Most expect medical imaging utilization and the need for diagnostic radiologists to increase in the foreseeable future, and do not expect AI to make radiologists redundant. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: The views of clinicians on radiology and its future may be used to determine how radiology should be practiced and be further developed. KEY POINTS: • Clinicians generally regard medical imaging as high-value care and expect to use more medical imaging in the future. • Clinicians mainly need radiologists for cross-sectional imaging interpretation while they interpret a substantial proportion of radiographs completely by themselves. • The majority of clinicians expects that the need for diagnostic radiologists will not decrease (half of them even expect that we need more) and does not believe that AI will replace radiologists. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00330-023-09897-2.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10667510
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106675102023-07-12 Diagnostic radiology and its future: what do clinicians need and think? Kwee, Thomas C. Almaghrabi, Maan T. Kwee, Robert M. Eur Radiol Experimental OBJECTIVE: To investigate the view of clinicians on diagnostic radiology and its future. METHODS: Corresponding authors who published in the New England Journal of Medicine and the Lancet between 2010 and 2022 were asked to participate in a survey about diagnostic radiology and its future. RESULTS: The 331 participating clinicians gave a median score of 9 on a 0–10 point scale to the value of medical imaging in improving patient-relevant outcomes. 40.6%, 15.1%, 18.9%, and 9.5% of clinicians indicated to interpret more than half of radiography, ultrasonography, CT, and MRI examinations completely by themselves, without consulting a radiologist or reading the radiology report. Two hundred eighty-nine clinicians (87.3%) expected an increase in medical imaging utilization in the coming 10 years, whereas 9 clinicians (2.7%) expected a decrease. The need for diagnostic radiologists in the coming 10 years was expected to increase by 162 clinicians (48.9%), to remain stable by 85 clinicians (25.7%), and to decrease by 47 clinicians (14.2%). Two hundred clinicians (60.4%) expected that artificial intelligence (AI) will not make diagnostic radiologists redundant in the coming 10 years, whereas 54 clinicians (16.3%) thought the opposite. CONCLUSION: Clinicians who published in the New England Journal of Medicine or the Lancet attribute high value to medical imaging. They generally need radiologists for cross-sectional imaging interpretation, but for a considerable proportion of radiographs, their service is not required. Most expect medical imaging utilization and the need for diagnostic radiologists to increase in the foreseeable future, and do not expect AI to make radiologists redundant. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: The views of clinicians on radiology and its future may be used to determine how radiology should be practiced and be further developed. KEY POINTS: • Clinicians generally regard medical imaging as high-value care and expect to use more medical imaging in the future. • Clinicians mainly need radiologists for cross-sectional imaging interpretation while they interpret a substantial proportion of radiographs completely by themselves. • The majority of clinicians expects that the need for diagnostic radiologists will not decrease (half of them even expect that we need more) and does not believe that AI will replace radiologists. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00330-023-09897-2. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023-07-12 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10667510/ /pubmed/37436504 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-09897-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Experimental
Kwee, Thomas C.
Almaghrabi, Maan T.
Kwee, Robert M.
Diagnostic radiology and its future: what do clinicians need and think?
title Diagnostic radiology and its future: what do clinicians need and think?
title_full Diagnostic radiology and its future: what do clinicians need and think?
title_fullStr Diagnostic radiology and its future: what do clinicians need and think?
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic radiology and its future: what do clinicians need and think?
title_short Diagnostic radiology and its future: what do clinicians need and think?
title_sort diagnostic radiology and its future: what do clinicians need and think?
topic Experimental
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10667510/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37436504
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-09897-2
work_keys_str_mv AT kweethomasc diagnosticradiologyanditsfuturewhatdocliniciansneedandthink
AT almaghrabimaant diagnosticradiologyanditsfuturewhatdocliniciansneedandthink
AT kweerobertm diagnosticradiologyanditsfuturewhatdocliniciansneedandthink