Interventional radiology training programs should return to in-person interviews, association says

The Association of Program Directors in Interventional Radiology is urging institutions to return to in-person interviewing for the 2026–2027 recruiting cycle. 

APDIR—a section of the Society of Interventional Radiology—issued the proclamation in an updated statement shared on June 4. Residency programs first made this shift six years ago amid the pandemic, conducting interviews virtually to help limit the spread of COVID-19. 

However, “consistent with trends across surgical specialties,” the association is now advocating for a return to the pre-pandemic way of doing things. 

“The physical infrastructure of an IR program—including angiography suites, hybrid operating rooms, clinic space, and procedural work areas—is a core component of what applicants are evaluating when selecting a training program and cannot be meaningfully assessed without an in-person visit,” APDIR said in its updated statement.

The association acknowledged that interview formats are a “program level decision,” while emphasizing that in-person approaches are “appropriate and consistent with the unique characteristics of IR training.” It noted that the AAMC continues to recommend virtual interviews, which provide benefits in terms of equity and cost savings for candidates. However, the organization (formerly the Association of American Medical Colleges) also added that programs with unique goals and context may take different approaches, for sound reasons. 

“Interventional Radiology training inherently involves specialty-specific characteristics that make in-person interviews particularly valuable,” the APDIR statement reads. 

IR residency is a six-year commitment, it added, with trainees forming small, tight-knight teams of up to three individuals. This makes interpersonal rapport a “meaningful and consequential component of the selection process,” the statement reads. Applicants to IR are dual-pathway candidates who must navigate diagnostic and integrated IR decisions, “for whom direct program visits may materially inform significant career choices.” Plus, training typically involves procedural culture, team dynamics and hands-on workspace elements that are “difficult to assess adequately through a virtual format alone.”

APDIR emphasized that virtual or hybrid interviews remain “fully acceptable options” for programs whose unique considerations make that format preferable. The association also encouraged programs conducting in-person interviews to “limit applicant cost burden, including transparent communication about logistics and, where possible, consolidated scheduling.”

“APDIR will continue to gather data on interview format outcomes in IR recruitment and will update this guidance as evidence accumulates,” the statement concluded.