Evaluating RVUs as a measure of workload for use in assessing fatigue

Krupiński, Elizabeth A.; MacKinnon, Lea; Hasselbach, Karl; Taljanovic, Mihra S.

doi:10.1117/12.2082913

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, there are large variations between radiology groups and subspecialties [7][8][9][10], and most notably time spent on interpreting and reporting a case is at large unknown. A few exceptions can be found, for example in [11], where measured reporting times was used to determine actual RVUs for a set of procedure types, or in [12], where the work of three radiologists was closely monitored and a low overall correlation between time to read and RVU was found.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiologists’ Variation of Time to Read Across Different Procedure Types

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The workload of US radiologists has increased over the past two decades as measured through total annual relative value units (RVUs). This increase in RVUs generated suggests that radiologists' productivity has increased. However, true productivity (output unit per input unit; RVU per time) is at large unknown since actual time required to interpret and report a case is rarely recorded. In this study, we analyzed how the time to read a case varies between radiologists over a set of different procedure types by retrospectively extracting reading times from PACS usage logs. Specifically, we tested two hypotheses that; i) relative variation in time to read per procedure type increases as the median time to read a procedure type increases, and ii) relative rankings in terms of median reading speed for individual radiologists are consistent across different procedure types. The results that, i) a correlation of -0.25 between the coefficient of variation and median time to read and ii) that only 12 out of 46 radiologists had consistent rankings in terms of time to read across different procedure types, show both hypotheses to be without support. The results show that workload distribution will not follow any general rule for a radiologist across all procedures or a general rule for a specific procedure across many readers. Rather the findings suggest that improved overall practice efficiency can be achieved only by taking into account radiologists' individual productivity per procedure type when distributing unread cases.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiologists’ Variation of Time to Read Across Different Procedure Types

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In these days of increased pressure to read more images and more complex images in less time, 4 finding ways to maintain high levels of diagnostic accuracy is becoming more and more important. Drew et al tested an image presentation paradigm to assess whether subtle differences can be readily detected when the images are toggled back and forth in the same location.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating RVUs as a measure of workload for use in assessing fatigue

Cited by 2 publications

References 40 publications

Radiologists’ Variation of Time to Read Across Different Procedure Types

Radiologists’ Variation of Time to Read Across Different Procedure Types

Special Section Guest Editorial: Medical Image Perception: Understanding How Radiologists Understand Images

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About