Radiologists skeptical of projections that rad shortages will persist into 2055

Members of the specialty are expressing skepticism over projections that radiologist shortages may persist into 2055, without actions to counter related trends. 

The Neiman Health Policy Institute first published its forecasts Feb. 12 in the Journal of the American College of Radiology. Based on population growth, aging, physician attrition and other factors, experts believe current radiologist shortages will continue. That’s unless actions are taken to bolster the number of trainees while curbing orders for inappropriate medical imaging. 

Radiologists have taken to social media, sharing doubts about the two studies’ conclusions. 

“I am highly skeptical of 30-year projections on rad labor force numbers and imaging volumes,” Ned Holman, MD, a private practice radiologist based in Alaska, wrote on X.com Feb. 12. “We have no idea what technologies may arise or how laws may change to effect supply of diagnostic imaging interpretation. Any growth in training programs should be done with caution.”

“I couldn’t agree more,” added Seth M. Hardy, MD, MBA, an academic radiologist based in the Lancaster, Pennsylvania, metro area. 

Ben White, MD—a writer and Texas neuroradiologist—published a blog about the studies Monday, labeling 30-year projections of rad supply and demand “a fool’s errand.” He noted there is more nuance to the forecasts than reported in the original Radiology Business story. Key trends such as higher attrition in recent years and increased utilization rates (outside of aging or other demographics) “could easily result in big differences.” 

“Does anyone think taking any version of the current status quo of either the radiology workforce and current imaging volume trends and extrapolating 30 YEARS into the future generates a meaningful prediction?” White wrote Feb. 24. “Radiology was radically different 30 years ago and multiple predictions during that period were comically wrong. I don’t see a reason to assume the future will be any more predictable. A world where AI changes nothing and the already increasing role of nonradiologists in imaging interpretation (including but limited to mid-levels) magically flatlines is not a world I think we live in. A stable 30-year workforce shortage would be…impressive.”

Eric W. Christensen, PhD, lead author of both studies, called criticisms “fair” and acknowledged that “a lot can change in 30 years.” 

“We don’t know how AI may change things or if the interpretation share by nonradiologists will change dramatically,” Christensen, who is research director of the Health Policy Institute, told Radiology Business by email Monday. “That said, I feel like we acknowledged these issues in the papers. The point was to focus on some of the big rocks (attrition, residency positions and current utilization trends) to show how important these factors are in changing the relative demand-supply imbalance that currently exists. The 30-year predictions of attrition and residency positions are instructive regardless of what happens with AI, for example. The criticisms are without alterative. Yes, AI impact is an unknown, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t make some predictions to understand the implications of the big rocks that are more predictable.”