Editorial Comment

Abstract

affiliated specialty. It cannot be deciphered if APPs were performing part or all of these procedures independently or as assistants, nor can it be ascertained if it was under urology or radiology affiliation or training. Additionally, there may exist an underrepresentation of APP involvement if APPs are involved in the procedure but the billing is only through a supervising physician. Lastly, the context of procedures cannot be extrapolated from the dataset, and our analysis would not be able to capture clinical reasons for why 1 subspecialty may perform a procedure over another. ConclusionUroradiology procedures have seen shifts in the distribution of which specialty performs each procedure. Most large changes in reimbursement and procedure proportion were shifted between the fields of urology and radiology, with APPs mainly seeing smaller changes. These findings are important to consider in the context of changing urology practice, procedural training, and in providing urologic care in the face of an impending urologist shortage.