Is radiology going down?

[SquidDoc]

this coming from an Osteopath. Surely.
Yeah whatever.

Jamaroqui= hater of radiologist and osteopathic physicians. Wow. You certainly did not come over here to make any friends.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Zweihander]

I do not understand it

Yes Sunny Muffins, we know you don't.

I present FACTS

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

 

[Amxcvbcv]

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

You're my new hero, Zweihander.

 

[Docxter]

ok *****, so show me those stats BOOYAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

1. The AMA FRIEDA database no longer has the Radiology/Neurology/Neuroradiology field as a residency:
http://www.ama-assn.org/vapp/freida/srch/1,1239,,00.html

2. Emory, U.Wisconsin, NYU, Cleveland clinic, Johns Hopkins and a few others had the combined program. Most of them have since closed.

These are FACTS, rather than lame OPINION from an uninformed and prejudiced individual.

 

[Zweihander]

You're my new hero, Zweihander.

I'm kind of sad he got banned -- it's rare that you get someone who's so incredibly proud of having such dumb ideas. He may not have been a very good troll, but he sure had exuberance.

 

[dphoenix]

1. The AMA FRIEDA database no longer has the Radiology/Neurology/Neuroradiology field as a residency:
http://www.ama-assn.org/vapp/freida/srch/1,1239,,00.html


Anyone know the reason why these programs died? I heard from a friend that it was because too many people in the programs were using it as a backdoor into straight radiology, jumping ship. I was wondering if this was true or not. Too bad, because I was actually interested in it too.

 

[f_w]

I'm kind of sad he got banned -- it's rare that you get someone who's so incredibly proud of having such dumb ideas. He may not have been a very good troll, but he sure had exuberance.

What did he get banned for. You can be stupid, no law against that.

His blather reminded me of some punk from about a year ago who was all gung-ho about self-dealing clinician imaging. He sort of faded away (back into the neurology forum).

 

[Zweihander]

What did he get banned for. You can be stupid, no law against that.

For trolling, presumably.

 

[Docxter]

1. The AMA FRIEDA database no longer has the Radiology/Neurology/Neuroradiology field as a residency:
http://www.ama-assn.org/vapp/freida/srch/1,1239,,00.html


Anyone know the reason why these programs died? I heard from a friend that it was because too many people in the programs were using it as a backdoor into straight radiology, jumping ship. I was wondering if this was true or not. Too bad, because I was actually interested in it too.

Yes, that was the main reason as I had already mentioned in my post earlier in this thread. Also, now the doors to neurointerventional fellowships are (relatively) open to neurologists after doing a vascular neurology or critical care neurology fellowship.

 

[bigfrank]

Yes, that was the main reason as I had already mentioned in my post earlier in this thread. Also, now the doors to neurointerventional fellowships are (relatively) open to neurologists after doing a vascular neurology or critical care neurology fellowship.

Regardless, the field is also VERY open (preferentially so) to radiology grads.

 

[MD2B2011]

Hey guys,

Do you know if any of the 7-year combined residencies are open anymore? I know it's no longer on FREIDA (not even a heading anymore) and all the ones I was planning on applying to (JHU, NYU) are gone. It's too bad, I thought it would useful to have a better clinical perspective by tacking on the extra time in Neuro.

 

[peduncle]

so for the sake of being true to the thread..... is radiology going down?

 

[OHMAN0125]

so for the sake of being true to the thread..... is radiology going down?

No field is 100% going "up" all the time. I think each goes through cyclic changes. But in my opinion Radiology is at the top and going to stay there for years. Only thing stopping it is if imaging becomes unpopular and we go back to the physical exam for most diagnosis.
I think every patient that is admitted to the hospital has at least 1 imaging study. Many have multiple ones. With the ACR lobbying to limit self-referral imaging, demand is likely to go up even with some outsourcing (which is basically a small issue in my opinion). The outsourcing that is scary is that larger hospitals are contracting to read for smaller rural areas. I think MGH recently is an example of this. Smaller radiology groups will be in trouble if this becomes common practice. YOu might as well have a "Walmart" of radiology then. Lol.

 

[MossPoh]

I can't believe I read as much of this thread as I did. Radiology is not going down, it is evolving like every other field of medicine. Compared to other fields, radiology is relatively new. The technology is evolving and shifting so fast one HAS to specialize in it. This is not something you can just go about your daily work and casually learn about on the side. I have read so many misleading and incorrect "FACTS" (had to quote our antagonistic buddy) on this thread it is ridiculous. Most of them are from people are ignorant to the details, which is fine...we're all ignorant. I don't claim to know everything, but damn, some of this crap is ridiculous. I simply can't see how a field, which really started to mature and develop an identity in the late 70s- early 80s is already dead. The sky is not falling, and the people who do have the sky fall on them simply refuse to evolve, or are blind to change...both bad traits for a radiologist, as well as most other physicians.

 

[MD2B2011]

Radiology does not seem to be in decline by any means. It is increasingly competitive, pay is still relatively reasonable and has not suffered from the problems that other specialties like general surg have had in recent times. With preventive screening (e.g. mammography) increasing in popularity and public awareness as well as clinicians' increasing dependence on imaging, I don't think radiologists will ever find themselves limited.

The practice of radiology is, however, shifting to larger practice settings from what I have read - this is just true of businesses in general nowadays, with increasing administrative and logistical complexity, the American healthcare system requires nearly all physicians to pool their resources into large group practice, and I don't see this as a problem for the radiologist who will undoubtedly benefit from this organization.

From the radiologists I know, they view their field as growing and a great field of innovation and do not have the bitter sentiments I have seen expressed by physicians in many other specialties.

In short, radiology is by no means going down and on the issue of salary, it has been quite stable and reasonable in comparison to others.

 

[Path or bust]

In short, radiology is by no means going down and on the issue of salary, it has been quite stable and reasonable in comparison to others.

I'm an MS4 going into Pathology and I considered pursuing Radiology. l will be the first to say that within medicine, Radiology has one the brightest futures as far as innovation and usefulness to clinical management.

It will continue to be compensated above other specialties but even if it does take cuts, so will all others. Both were great options for me and I don't think I could have gone wrong either way; it was that blasted prelim year that rads requires which is full of patients....no way in hell. No, no, no. (shudder)

Seriously though, many of the reasons that salaries are stable (for all of medicine) is due to the fact that everyone is working much harder. The system truly sucks because really nobody has been given a raise, therefore the reasons you might see salaries increase is because physicians work more hours.

I think the original poster thinks a field "goes down" if reimbursement cuts are made. In that sense, all fields of medicine are "down", across the board. Even if for some wild reason radiology were to take monetary cuts there is no way that it affects the extremely positive outlook for the future. Just look at all the different residency boards and you will see that this is a hot issue for all those involved in medicine. Nobody is exempt...but for me path and/or rads is the way to go.

 

[ianbrown]

i have a question about the future of diagnostic radiology. i agree that with respect to IR, there will be competition from the various respective specialties (e.g., neurosurg), but could this happen in DR also? I don't think it could happen (or should happen) without additional training, but would they ever open up diagnostic imaging fellowships to non-radiologists? e.g., would a neurologist ever be able to do a diagnostic neuroradiology fellowship? at first this may seem silly... the argument against it is obvious: what if a neurologist reading a spine film misses a mass in the abdomen? but as new imaging technologies evolve and more scans are ordered, it seems like it will become harder for even a general diagnostic radiologist to keep on top of all the advances, requiring even more subspecialization, and it will be harder for these subspecialists to keep on top of advances in other areas anyways (e.g., a neuroradiologist of the future, reading some new imaging modality of the spine, misses a subtle finding in the abdomen which they were never trained to see when they were a resident because that type of imaging did not exist?).

btw, i'm not talking about a neurologist who dabbles in neuroradiology, but someone who actually wants to read scans full-time...

 

[masterMood]

yeah!

 

[DrCos]

This may be heretical to say but I kinda look at radiology as replacing the H&P. You can go through 10 pages of H&P, 20 things on the differential, and one CT scan which shows appendicitis. Diagnosis is made.

It's concerning to hear people talking about a CT scan as if it's no big deal. The radiation doses from one scan is not zero and indiscriminantly scanning will lead to cancers and other complications ie cataracts. I don't think we should be advocating wholesale CT scans to rule out clinical decision making and forethought. Most radiologists would agree that a scan is useless without a clinical question which it is supposed to answer.

 

[digitlnoize]

It's concerning to hear people talking about a CT scan as if it's no big deal. The radiation doses from one scan is not zero and indiscriminantly scanning will lead to cancers and other complications ie cataracts. I don't think we should be advocating wholesale CT scans to rule out clinical decision making and forethought. Most radiologists would agree that a scan is useless without a clinical question which it is supposed to answer.

One word. Tort Reform. Wait...that's two words. Whatever...you get the idea. People scan because they're afraid to get sued. Cap those lawsuits at the value of peoples' life insurance policies and problems solved. You shouldn't be able to sue for more than you think your life is worth!

 

[f_w]

One word. Tort Reform. Wait...that's two words. Whatever...you get the idea.

Just finished a conversation with the director of our ER. The content came down to this:

- In the last month, we have done a number of CTs on pregnant patients, each one after careful deliberation about risks, benefits and alternatives. Still, we are both mindful of the possibility of being sued one day for creating a 2-headed baby or being blamed for mental ******ation or childhood cancer.

- 2 towns over, a 38wk pregnant lady died last week of a SAH, hours after she had seen her PCP for headaches.

You can't win.

 

[digitlnoize]

Just finished a conversation with the director of our ER. The content came down to this:

- In the last month, we have done a number of CTs on pregnant patients, each one after careful deliberation about risks, benefits and alternatives. Still, we are both mindful of the possibility of being sued one day for creating a 2-headed baby or being blamed for mental ******ation or childhood cancer.

- 2 towns over, a 38wk pregnant lady died last week of a SAH, hours after she had seen her PCP for headaches.

You can't win.

Ok. 2 Solutions.

1. We surround every uterus with a lead vault.

2. The get the physicists to develop an imaging tech that doesn't use radiation...hmm...would that still count as radiology.

 

[f_w]

2. The get the physicists to develop an imaging tech that doesn't use radiation...hmm...would that still count as radiology.

Well, we do have non-ionizing alternatives for some tests. A pregnant patient with a headache for example can get a non-contrast MRI of the head.

 

[Neuronix]

2. The get the physicists to develop an imaging tech that doesn't use radiation...hmm...would that still count as radiology.

Assuming you meant non-ionizing radiation, does Ultrasound and MRI count as Radiology?

 

[drstrangelove]

1) This has nothing to do with me "liking radiology a lot." I actually don't love it, I just think it's the best among an otherwise very bad heap of choices. There's a lot of easier ways to make money in life than being a doctor, and I plan to pursue them.

What do you plan to pursue?

At what point do you recommend pursuing things other than medicine and getting out of medicine.. ASAP, after medical school, after internship, after residency, after fellowship, after practicing for a bit?

Is going to medical school a bad choice? Was it a bad choice for you? Residency?

3) This statement clearly demonstrates your naive foolishness. Do you think I give two hoots who interprets images or who reads my reports or not? I couldn't care less friend. The point is, I get paid for it. Back to the baseball analogy -- you can call or a ball or a strike to your hearts content... it doesn't mean squat. It's what the ump calls it that matters and the ump gets paid big bucks to do so.

In the short term you do get paid for dictating reports. But in the long term, don't you think it matters who is reading them, what they are getting out of them, how it affects management, and so on? If truly noone reads them won't that undermine your getting paid to dictate them eventually?

 

[hans19]

In the short term you do get paid for dictating reports. But in the long term, don't you think it matters who is reading them, what they are getting out of them, how it affects management, and so on? If truly noone reads them won't that undermine your getting paid to dictate them eventually?

Absolutely. As a radiologist, ultimately you are a commodity. But as a community radiologist, there is added value added to your physical presence. The clinicians love it when you can personally review a film with them. IE. You develop a relationship with the clinician such that, If you are good at what you do, (s)he comes to truss you and eventually relies on and values your opinion. As a telerad, a bit of the face time may be lost. And you are in danger of being replaced at any time, by someone who is willing to under bid you.

If you are flippant about your reads, people will ignore your reads and eventually look elsewhere.