Beyond 'tech': Restoring professional identity in imaging

Across healthcare, the word tech gets thrown around casually. Patient care techs, pharmacy techs, monitor techs are all very different roles with very different levels of training, compensation and responsibility. Into that mix, radiologic technologists are also lumped as techs. The result? The unique scope of practice in imaging is blurred, limiting how the profession is understood.

I’ve seen this firsthand in my role leading imaging operations. Many outside of radiology don’t fully grasp the depth of decision-making, clinical responsibility, and patient impact that happens in imaging every day. This isn’t just an imaging problem. It’s an industrywide dilemma that creates ambiguity across healthcare professions and undermines recognition of specialized contributions.

Clinical Impact

Every day, imaging professionals make decisions with immediate consequences for patient outcomes:

• An MRI technologist researches a patient’s implant and determines an ordered exam cannot proceed due to incompatibility.
• A CT technologist identifies a brain bleed in real time and alerts a radiologist, expediting life-saving care.
• A sonographer recognizes ovarian torsion and escalates care, shortening time to surgery and preserving fertility.

These are not routine tasks. They represent advanced judgment and clinical expertise that rival the responsibilities of other licensed professionals.

Imaging’s title journey: technician-->technologist-->'tech'

In the 1980s, the American Society of Radiologic Technologists (ASRT) led a successful push to replace technician with technologist, recognizing the education and clinical decision-making behind imaging practice.

But in today’s fast-paced environment, efficiency drives language. Paramedic becomes medic, respiratory therapist becomes RT, and radiology technologist is now reduced to tech. 

Sue Limpert, medical radiographer at SUNY Upstate Medical University Hospital, adds: “And of course, most people think tech means technician, so we are frequently mislabeled that way also…” 

When pay matches, but words don’t

Compensation already reflects the professional reality: Imaging technologists often earn on par with respiratory therapists and registered nurses. Those roles were once similarly viewed as “technical” or “supportive.” Today, they’re recognized as licensed professionals with clearly defined identities.

By contrast, imaging technologists remain linguistically tied to tech even as the field grows and complexity increases.

Recent healthcare title shifts highlight the importance of language. Physician assistant is being reframed as physician associate, lab techs as medical laboratory scientists, and nurse educators in some systems are being retitled as nursing practice development practitioners. Each change aligned title with practice, improving clarity, recruitment and recognition. Imaging deserves the same.

What leaders can do now

Progress is possible. At one hospital system, radiology extenders once carried the title “radiology facilitators.” This role was reintroduced as radiology practice coordinators (RPCs) to boost recruitment and align scope. Similarly, the ASRT has recently supported licensure bills to ensure imaging and radiation therapy professionals are formally recognized as professionals and not ancillary staff.

Thoughtfully, Patricia Pilgrim-Antoine, a certified registered nurse anesthetist, points out: “You have to get rid of the word ‘technologist’ first. With ‘technologist’ comes ‘tech.’”

That raises the question: Is it time for radiology to move beyond technologist altogether? Should the field embrace radiographer or another title that better reflects clinical expertise?

Leaders can act now by:

• Piloting revisions in job postings and career ladders.
• Partnering with professional societies for advocacy.
• Educating hospital leadership with real-world examples that highlight imaging’s clinical contributions.
• Modeling precise language by using technologist instead of tech and exploring titles that reflect advanced scope.

Shorthand may seem harmless, but when it lumps diverse healthcare workers into the same bucket, it erodes professional identity. Over time, that erosion can contribute to a loss of recognition, weaker recruitment pipelines, slower growth in compensation, and diminished retention. Titles are not semantics; they are strategy and it’s time for imaging to align its titles with its practice. 

Interested in submitting a guest piece to Radiology Business? Email Editor Marty Stempniak at [email protected]