Background and Objectives: Most studies based on self-reported data indicate that female patients more often than males have a same-gender preference for their primary care physician (PCP). Because self-reported preferences may not reflect true preferences, we analyzed objective data to investigate patients’ preferences for PCP gender. Methods: Analyses were performed on 2192 new patients seen within a university-based healthcare system by 13 PCPs (2 male, 11 female) during 2017. New patients were asked about their PCP gender preference when assigned a PCP. We compared the expected prevalence (proportion of males/females in overall patient population) and observed prevalence (gender distribution of patients for each PCP) by PCP gender. A mixed model with PCP as a random effect examined the odds of male and female patients being assigned a same-gender physician. Results: The expected prevalence of new patients was 65% female and 35% male. The observed prevalence (95% confidence interval [CI]) of male patients among male and female PCPs was, respectively, 59.7% (49.0%-69.5%) and 28.0% (24.0%-32.4%), with neither CI containing the expected prevalence of male patients (35%). Similarly, the observed prevalence of female patients among male and female PCPs was, respectively, 40.3% (95% CI 30.5%-51.0%) and 72.0% (95% CI 67.6%-76.0%), with neither CI containing the expected prevalence of female patients (65%). Conclusions: Both male and female patients often preferred to see a same-gender PCP with this preference more pronounced in males. Future research should seek to clarify the relationships between patients’ gender preferences, patient-physician gender concordance/discordance, patient satisfaction, and health outcomes.

Purpose: Computed tomography (CT) coronary angiography performed on a detector-based spectral scanner helps more closely approximate severity of stenosis with nuclear medicine and cardiac catheterization tests compared with single-energy CT (SECT) in patients with an original CAD-RADS score of 3 and higher.Methods: This retrospective trial was conducted between January 2017 and December 2019 and included 52 patients with a CAD-RADS score of 3 and higher. Two reading sessions were performed 6 weeks apart. The first reading session was performed using only conventional images and the second reading session was performed using spectral results. Detector-based spectral CT CAD-RADS scores were compared with cardiac stress test and/or cardiac catheterization results for final characterization of stenosis in 41 segments from 32 patients. The mean CAD-RADS score was calculated for both the conventional images and spectral images. Results:The CAD-RADS score for SECT and the score for spectral CT for the 41 segments were compared. Available associated stress test and/or cardiac catheterization results were also compared with CAD-RADS scores. In 51% (21/41), a diagnosis concordant with best practices results was achieved with the help of spectral CT results. A mean CAD-RADS score of 3.56 was obtained using spectral results, compared with 3.93 using conventional images. A 2-tailed paired t test determined the difference to be significant with a P value of 0.007. Conclusions:Computed tomography coronary angiography is feasible on a detector-based spectral CT scanner and can improve diagnostic confidence over SECT angiography in patients with an original CAD-RADS score of 3 and higher.