Purpose: Burnout is a psychological syndrome in response to chronic occupational stressors. The prevalence of burnout among medical professionals has been increasing, and recent studies have shown that radiologists are among those affected. We investigated the prevalence of burnout and assessed associated factors among cardiothoracic radiologists. Materials and Methods: Society of Thoracic Radiology members were invited to complete an anonymous cross-sectional survey that included an adapted Maslach Burnout Inventory and questions about demographics, work place characteristics, and stressors. Results: The survey response rate was 33.1% (290/874). Per-item response rate ranged from 94% to 100% with a median of 99%. The prevalence of emotional exhaustion was 66.8% (186/283), depersonalization was 79% (223/283), and low personal accomplishment was 23% (65/280). There were no statistically significant differences between academic and private practice. There was a trend toward worse burnout in women, but this was not statistically significant. Being in early career (0 to 10 y since fellowship) was associated with low personal accomplishment [odds ratio (OR): 2.07, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.08-3.99]. Those working fewer than 51 hours per week were significantly less likely to report emotional exhaustion (OR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.33-0.90). The odds of emotional exhaustion for those producing fewer than 7500 work relative value units per year were approximately half of those exceeding that number (OR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.22-0.95). Conclusions: The prevalence of burnout among cardiothoracic radiologists is comparable to that reported for radiologists in other subspecialties such as musculoskeletal and interventional radiology. High work relative value unit productivity and longer work hours are associated with higher prevalence of burnout.
Purpose: We investigated the impact of modality-specific volumes and other potential stressors on burnout and career-choice satisfaction. Materials and Methods: An anonymous survey of 36 questions was sent by email to all 875 faculty members of the STR. These included 11 multiple-choice questions, 23 Likert questions, and 2 free-text questions. The Maslach Burnout Index was used to assess the prevalence of the 3 components of burnout (emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and low professional accomplishment), and we assessed variations among the potential sources of stress with respect to the respondent sex, career stage, and practice setting. Respondents were asked to estimate daily work volume as if interpreting only chest radiographs (CXRs) or only chest/cardiac computed tomography (CT). Statistical analysis was performed using Excel (Microsoft), open-source statistical computing package pandas and SciPy for Python, and Jupyter Notebook, an open-source interactive computing platform. Results: Although financial concerns (49.3%), lack of input into decisions (48.6%), and inadequate staffing (45.2%) were additional stressors, the major sources were work-life balance (67.4%) and workload (66.8%), which were more frequently cited by women than men (78.9% vs. 60.8%, P=0.001). Emotional exhaustion and depersonalization were related to higher CXR volumes. Although 83.2% were satisfied being a diagnostic radiologist, 18.8% had thought of leaving medicine. More than half of all radiologists interpreted ≥150 CXRs daily (51.1% vs. 53.6%); more in private practice read ≥200 CXRs (23.2% vs. 14.7%). Of the academic radiologists, 80.2% interpreted 21 to 49 CTs; twice as many in private practice read ≥50 CTs (25.5% vs. 12.7%). Conclusions: The contributing factors to cardiothoracic radiologist burnout vary by sex, career stage, and practice setting. Several stressors, especially work-life balance, were associated with higher burnout prevalence. Most respondents expressed career-choice satisfaction. Defining threshold work volumes associated with higher rates of burnout is an important first step in defining burnout prevention guardrails.
Purpose: Routine head and neck CTAs (CTAhead+neck) performed for dizziness in the Emergency Department (ED) has steadily increased, but its clinical utility is still poorly elucidated. Our purpose was to assess the radiologic outcomes of CTAhead+neck in ED dizziness patients. Methods: ED dizziness patients with CTAhead+neck from January 2010 through November 2019 were retrospectively identified and further stratified into central vertigo (CV), peripheral vertigo (PV), and non-specific dizziness (NSD) groups by final clinical diagnoses. Findings on CTAhead+neck (vessel stenosis >50%, occlusion, dissection, and infarct), and infarct on subsequent MRI if performed, were assessed. Differences in imaging findings were analyzed using chi-square or Fisher’s exact tests. Results: Of 867 dizziness patients, 88 were diagnosed with CV, 383 with PV, and 396 with NSD. On CTAhead+neck, 11.4% of all patients had posterior CTA findings, including posterior occlusions (4.2%), dissections (1.2%), and infarcts (2.3%). CV patients had more posterior circulation findings (31.8%) versus PV (9.9%) and NSD (8.3%) patients (both p < 0.01). 21.6% of CV patients had acute infarcts on CT versus none for PV and 0.03% for NSD patients (both p < 0.01). On MRI, 46.6% of CV patients had acute posterior circulation infarcts versus none for PV and 0.3% for NSD patients ( p < 0.01). Conclusion: Diagnostic yield for CTAhead+neck for dizziness patients is low except in central vertigo patients which constitute only 1/10th of CTAs performed. Our single institution results support that CTAhead+neck is likely low-yield in patients with high clinical suspicion for PV or NSD and further studies are needed to test this hypothesis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.