PURPOSE: To describe the current state and limitations to interventional radiology (IR) in Canada through a large, national survey of Canadian interventional radiologists. METHODS: An anonymous online survey was offered to members of the Canadian Interventional Radiology Association (CIRA). Only staff radiologists were invited to participate. RESULTS: Seventy-five (75) responses were received from a total of 247, giving a response rate of 30%. Respondents were split approximately equally between academic centers (47%) and community practice (53%), and the majority of interventional radiologists worked in hospitals with either 200-500 (49%) or 500-1,000 (39%) beds. Procedures listed by respondents as most commonly performed in their practice included PICC line insertion (83%), angiography and stenting (65%), and percutaneous biopsy (37%). Procedures listed as not currently performed but which interventional radiologists believed would benefit their patient population included radiofrequency ablation (36%), carotid stenting (34%), and aortic stenting (21%); the majority of respondents noted that a lack of support from referring services was the main reason for not performing these procedures (56%). Impediments to increasing scope and volume of practice in Canadian IR were most commonly related to room or equipment shortage (35%), radiologist shortage (33%), and a lack of funding or administrative support (28%). CONCLUSION: Interventional radiology in Canada is limited by a number of factors including funding, manpower, and referral support. A concerted effort should be undertaken by individual interventional radiologists and IR organizations to increase training capacity, funding, remuneration, and public exposure to IR in order to help advance the subspecialty.
PURPOSE: To describe the current state and limitations to interventional radiology (IR) in Canada through a large, national survey of Canadian interventional radiologists. METHODS: An anonymous online survey was offered to members of the Canadian Interventional Radiology Association (CIRA). Only staff radiologists were invited to participate. RESULTS: Seventy-five (75) responses were received from a total of 247, giving a response rate of 30%. Respondents were split approximately equally between academic centers (47%) and community practice (53%), and the majority of interventional radiologists worked in hospitals with either 200-500 (49%) or 500-1,000 (39%) beds. Procedures listed by respondents as most commonly performed in their practice included PICC line insertion (83%), angiography and stenting (65%), and percutaneous biopsy (37%). Procedures listed as not currently performed but which interventional radiologists believed would benefit their patient population included radiofrequency ablation (36%), carotid stenting (34%), and aortic stenting (21%); the majority of respondents noted that a lack of support from referring services was the main reason for not performing these procedures (56%). Impediments to increasing scope and volume of practice in Canadian IR were most commonly related to room or equipment shortage (35%), radiologist shortage (33%), and a lack of funding or administrative support (28%). CONCLUSION: Interventional radiology in Canada is limited by a number of factors including funding, manpower, and referral support. A concerted effort should be undertaken by individual interventional radiologists and IR organizations to increase training capacity, funding, remuneration, and public exposure to IR in order to help advance the subspecialty.
Authors: Matthew Oliver; Michael M Dinh; Kate Curtis; Royce Paschkewitz; Oran Rigby; Zsolt J Balogh Journal: World J Surg Date: 2017-08 Impact factor: 3.352