Summary:
Dr. McGahan
is Vice Chair, University of California, Davis Medical Center,
Department of Radiology, Sacramento, CA. He is also a member of
the editorial board of this journal.
As I listened to one of my abdominal imaging fellows negotiate
for his future private practice radiology contrac
Dr. McGahan
is Vice Chair, University of California, Davis Medical Center,
Department of Radiology, Sacramento, CA. He is also a member of
the editorial board of this journal.
As I listened to one of my abdominal imaging fellows negotiate
for his future private practice radiology contract, one of the
first questions that his future employer asked was, "Do you do
mammography?" The willingness to do breast imaging became a pivotal
point of negotiations with his future group. The group wanted his
services as an abdominal imager, including doing breast imaging,
but he did not want to do mammography in his future practice. He
finally negotiated that he would not perform breast imaging in his
new job. I listened to another colleague in private practice who
does full-time breast imaging complain that while his group is
fully staffed in other subspecialties, there has always been a need
for breast imaging staff within his group, with these positions
remaining unfilled.
Many subspecialties in radiology have recently been producing an
abundance of fellowship trainees. Recent trends indicate there are
fewer job openings than applicants in certain subspecialties in
radiology. However, the opposite is true for mammography, in which
there are 2 to 2.5 job advertisements per job seeker.
1
Why is there such a national shortage of breast imagers? In
speaking with our residents and future fellows, they are acutely
interested in new developing modalities such as MRI. Within our
institution (the University of California, Davis Medical Center),
none of our residents in the past 10 years has chosen a breast
imaging fellowship, until this year. Our graduates who choose
private practice have tended to choose subspecialties heavily
weighted in MRI and CT techniques rather than breast imaging. Other
problems with breast imaging cited by some of our graduates are the
potential litiginous situations, the repetitive nature of
mammography, and the perceived lack of cutting-edge technology in
this field. It seems that some of these problems may persist in the
future.
Throughout the United States, the trends are not particularly
good. A recent publication by Basset et al
2
showed that many breast fellowship positions were unfilled in 2002.
There were 63 breast imaging fellowships filled that
year-surprisingly, 13 fewer than in 1994.In phone interviews of
senior residents, Bassett found that only 35% would consider a
fellowship in breast imaging if one were offered to them. Their
reasons were "not high tech," followed by "fear of lawsuits," and
"too stressful."
3
There are those who take a different route to full-time breast
imaging: migrating to breast imaging once in practice. Even Dr.
Bassett switched from another subspecialty to full-time breast
imaging because of a department need. At UC Davis, we are currently
adequately staffed in breast imaging, but with retirement just
around the corner for a couple members of our faculty, we are again
inthe position of looking for new breast imaging faculty.
This future shortage of breast imaging at our institution and at
institutions throughout the United States may exacerbate a problem
with patient access to imaging of breast disease. Anxiety is great
among those patients who have a screening mammogram and are called
back for additional views and who then have to wait 2 to 3 weeks to
obtain their diagnostic breast examination. This time delay is
increased with a shortage of breast imagers who often have a full
and busy work schedule.
How will this situation be remedied? Certainly, there must be
some incentive for radiologists to perform breast imaging. Those
general radiologists who have an interest in breast imaging may
increase the percentage of their time in breast imaging. However,
there are those who would argue that this is not the solution, as
these are not fellowship-trained breast imagers and that
"specialist" radiologists in breast imaging detect more cancers
than general radiologists doing breast imaging.
4
True or not, until there are adequate numbers of full-time or
fellowship-trained breast imagers, many general radiologists will
continue to perform breast imaging. Will financial or other
incentives help? Well, certainly if a radiologist cannot get his or
her "ideal" job or location, he or she may seek fellowship training
in breast imaging.
Perhaps interest in breast imaging will increase as residents
are introduced to the newer aspects of breast imaging. Continued
technical improvements in breast MRI will help. There is current
research at our institution into CT and PET of the breast, which
has increased the interest in breast imaging fellowships by the
residents at our institution. Breast tomosynthesis is an
up-and-coming modality that may make this field "more exciting" to
trainees and help alleviate the problem of shortage of breast
imagers. Until the perception of breast imaging changes, there may
continue to be a shortage of full-time breast imagers for the near
future. However, for the first time in many years, the number of
applicants to breast imaging fellowships has increased. Maybe times
are changing.