Many know Sol Radiology as the Southern California-based practice that, in this decade, grew from three radiologists to 45 in only three years. But other key indicators of Sol’s development might be the pieces from which presently small practices stand to learn the most.
When soaring imaging volumes began to exacerbate workload inequity and drive physician burnout, the leadership team at one prominent radiology practice found the root cause easy to isolate: operational fragmentation.
Radiology is rethinking reporting. Legacy systems are being swapped out in favor of intuitive, standardized, AI-powered tools. Greater automation is driving quantifiable improvements into both clinical outcomes and business metrics. Stated another way, radiology reporting is having a moment.
A referring physician orders an MRI of the lumbar spine and hits send. That order lands at three, sometimes four, outpatient imaging centers simultaneously. The center that contacts the patient first books the appointment. The rest miss out on the revenue.
3D surface modeling and virtual surgical planning are expanding radiology’s contribution to multidisciplinary teams. Together, AI-driven interpretation and 3D-enabled clinical collaboration represent two distinct, complementary forces shaping the next decade of radiology.
It’s no secret that healthcare in the U.S. provides comparatively poor value. That’s not an opinion. It’s a fact, as costs are high relative to outcomes compared to other Western nations. What can the profession of radiology do to help reduce the former while simultaneously improving the latter?
As a broad concept, good consumer value isn’t hard to get a handle on. Varying definitions abound, to be sure, but the phrase is widely understood as shorthand for the best you can get for the least you have to spend without sacrificing too much on quality within a given product or service category.
When we look at the future of PET, we think of new biomarkers and applications. Is conventional FDG PET maxed out? Or is there room to improve now? No it is not, and yes there is, molecular imaging experts say.
The “CD factory” had to go. That was the consensus reached four years ago by all parties involved in the handling of diagnostic images at the University of Rochester Medical Center (URMC), the regional healthcare hub in Western New York anchored by 800-bed Strong Memorial Hospital.
The question in the headline is not open-ended and philosophical. It is multiple-choice and strategic, as any given hospital or multi-hospital system now inevitably perceives its contracted radiology practices as occupying ground in one of only three possible capacities.
We’re only halfway through the current calendar year, and already radiology practice in the U.S. has been jolted by not one but two major transactions.
When it comes to diagnosing cancer, radiologists examine digital images and pathologists scrutinize slides. Only occasionally do the two collaborate prior to meetings of the tumor board or multidisciplinary team (MDT).
When working at a high volume breast imaging provider, radiologists can’t afford speed bumps. But hiccups in workflow are inevitable when a radiologist is forced to constantly switch between different workstations, each with their own interfaces and controls.
