We read with great interest the article by Wintermark et al, “Non-Relative Value Unit–Generating Activities Represent One-Fifth of Academic Neuroradiologist Productivity,”1 published on-line in March. It is in the “air du temps” (ie, spirit of the time or timely), when everything is quantified by being more economically productive.
In many hospitals in Switzerland and probably in most European countries, the clinical, scientific, and management times are not clearly defined and separated. This shortcoming is a real problem. Additionally, we do not have just specialized tumors boards as mentioned in the article but also other multidisciplinary meetings to discuss daily “routine” cases. These cases have been read and interpreted with formal reports written by different neuroradiologists. The additional question raised in our environment is whether these boards bring any additional value and whether, in this situation, the neuroradiologist's time task is measured correctly. Indeed, we are confronted with not just presenting the case once but very often rediscussing it and repreparing it, sometimes with additional postprocessing and follow-up discussions.
Therefore, in our opinion, this type of application could be a double-edged sword because as Wintermark et al have reported, recording time accurately is a difficult task. Indeed, by appearing to be very exact, it can fully underestimate the time devoted to different tasks. However, if correctly adapted and used, this type of application will be generalized in neuroradiology departments, first, to obtain enough resources; second, to determine the standards for the recommended number of cases that each working neuroradiologist should report2; third, to detect unnecessary or redundant tasks; and finally, to plan the necessary future workforce.
References
- 1.
- 2.
- © 2016 by American Journal of Neuroradiology