combined neuro/rads programs

[batman123]

What is the difference between these programs and neuro residencies with neurovascular/ stroke fellowships? Do both routes make docs qualified to do cerebrovascular/endovascular procedures, or do the combined programs give you a greater breadth of skill with procedures?

In the practicing world, how much time does a "stroke specialist" spend practicing general neurology? Do you have to give up general neuro to do stroke?


I apologize if these questions seem obvious, but I'm getting interested in neuro, and I wanted to get an idea of what the scope of practice is for the field.
Thanks

 

[Docxter]

What is the difference between these programs and neuro residencies with neurovascular/ stroke fellowships? Do both routes make docs qualified to do cerebrovascular/endovascular procedures, or do the combined programs give you a greater breadth of skill with procedures?

In the practicing world, how much time does a "stroke specialist" spend practicing general neurology? Do you have to give up general neuro to do stroke?


I apologize if these questions seem obvious, but I'm getting interested in neuro, and I wanted to get an idea of what the scope of practice is for the field.
Thanks

The combined programs make you both a neurologist and a radiologist, eligible to sit for both boards, and also be eligible to sit for the neuroradiology CAQ boards exam. The neurology residency+vascular neurology fellowship will make you eligible to sit for the neurology boards and vascular neurology CAQ exam.

Neither track will train you to be a fully-trained neurointerventionalist. You need extra training for that.

 

[Bonobo]

Both paths allow you to spend 1-2 additional years to train in neuro-interventional procedures. A combined neurology/radiology residency provides you with more security in terms of eventually becoming a neuro-interventionalist, but the neurology/vascular neurology pathway will accredit you in stroke formally and very likely still allow you to become a neuro-interventionalist anyway. The benefit of either pathway really depends on what you want in the end. If you want to be focused on stroke, then choose the latter, all the way. A few prominent radiology-trained neuro-interventionalists have told me that they wish they could be formally accredited in stroke, thus allowing them to run a comprehensive stroke center in the future if they so desired. If, however, you want to be an expert interventionalist, then choose the former where your training will be broad enough to encompass many of the procedures outside of stroke as well, such as embolization for posterior epistaxis, spinal interventions, etc.

I should note that either way, it will probably take 8-10 years of training, and be very intensive work. I wouldn't worry to much about competition since it is the field in all of medicine that requires the most years of training, AND basically q3 call for life, many who want this turn back eventually. In addition to all of the cardiology, radiology, and neurosurgery groups looking for neuro-interventionalists, every comprehensive stroke center will need 3 neuro-intervenionalists, so there will be ample job opportunities and need for fellowships in the future.

B