OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the training and attitudes of senior residents regarding breast imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 2008 a follow-up survey was completed by a chief or senior resident at 201 radiology training programs in North America. Questions included organization of breast imaging rotation, resident responsibilities, clinical practice protocols at the institution, resident impressions regarding breast imaging, and resident interest in performing breast imaging after residency. Results were compared with those of a survey completed in 2000. RESULTS: Of 201 training programs, 200 (99.5%) had dedicated breast imaging rotations; 190 (95%), 12 weeks or longer; and 39 (19%), 16 weeks or longer. Residents regularly performed real-time ultrasound imaging in 138 programs (69%), needle localization in 159 (79%), ultrasound-guided biopsy in 154 (77%), and stereotactically guided biopsy in 145 programs (72%). One hundred sixty-two residents (81%) reported that interpreting mammograms was more stressful than interpretation of other imaging studies; 143 (71%) believed that only breast imaging subspecialists should interpret mammograms; and 104 (52%) would not consider pursuing a breast imaging fellowship. As in 2000, the most common reasons cited for not considering a fellowship were lack of interest in the field, fear of lawsuits, and the stressful nature of the job. CONCLUSION: Residency programs have devoted more time to breast imaging and made improvements in their curricula, but current residents report decreased opportunities to perform some studies and procedures. Although most residents would not consider a fellowship and did not want to interpret mammograms in future practice, the percentage of residents who would not consider breast imaging as a subspecialty has decreased since 2000. An accurate picture of current breast imaging curricula and variations among residency programs is necessary to identify and correct systemic problems and to improve the training of future breast imagers.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the training and attitudes of senior residents regarding breast imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 2008 a follow-up survey was completed by a chief or senior resident at 201 radiology training programs in North America. Questions included organization of breast imaging rotation, resident responsibilities, clinical practice protocols at the institution, resident impressions regarding breast imaging, and resident interest in performing breast imaging after residency. Results were compared with those of a survey completed in 2000. RESULTS: Of 201 training programs, 200 (99.5%) had dedicated breast imaging rotations; 190 (95%), 12 weeks or longer; and 39 (19%), 16 weeks or longer. Residents regularly performed real-time ultrasound imaging in 138 programs (69%), needle localization in 159 (79%), ultrasound-guided biopsy in 154 (77%), and stereotactically guided biopsy in 145 programs (72%). One hundred sixty-two residents (81%) reported that interpreting mammograms was more stressful than interpretation of other imaging studies; 143 (71%) believed that only breast imaging subspecialists should interpret mammograms; and 104 (52%) would not consider pursuing a breast imaging fellowship. As in 2000, the most common reasons cited for not considering a fellowship were lack of interest in the field, fear of lawsuits, and the stressful nature of the job. CONCLUSION: Residency programs have devoted more time to breast imaging and made improvements in their curricula, but current residents report decreased opportunities to perform some studies and procedures. Although most residents would not consider a fellowship and did not want to interpret mammograms in future practice, the percentage of residents who would not consider breast imaging as a subspecialty has decreased since 2000. An accurate picture of current breast imaging curricula and variations among residency programs is necessary to identify and correct systemic problems and to improve the training of future breast imagers.
Authors: Lin H Bailey; Deborah O Jeffries; Jason J Bailey; Renee W Pinsky; Janet E Bailey; Bin Nan; Tianwen Ma; Katherine A Klein Journal: Emerg Radiol Date: 2018-03-03