Rationale and objectives: Patients with cancer who are referred to a dedicated oncology center usually have undergone previous imaging studies that the oncologists typically desire to have reviewed by radiologists. Such reinterpretations can be complex and time-consuming, yet many institutions do not systematically account for them as part of the total workload. The purpose of this study was to ascertain the numbers and types of second-opinion consultations performed by radiologists at a tertiary care cancer center, and to assess their effect on work volume.
Materials and methods: A survey of referring clinicians was undertaken to evaluate the numbers and types of second-opinion consultations requested of radiologists at the Dana Farber Cancer Institute during a 12-month period. Consultations included review of studies from outside institutions, and cases from Dana Farber in which further comparison was needed. The number of consultations requiring additional tumor size measurements was tallied. The mean daily number of new studies interpreted by radiologists was used as a benchmark of work volume.
Results: Radiologists performed 4,664 consultations during 254 workdays, interpreting a mean of 18 additional studies (range, 4-42) per day as a result of referrals for second opinion. These included 3,638 (78%) cross-sectional studies (ie, computed tomographic [CT], magnetic resonance [MR], and ultrasound [US] studies), 674 (14%) mammograms, 220 (5%) plain radiographs, 132 (3%) nuclear medicine scans, and one galactogram. Of the 4,664 consultations, 1,306 (28%) were performed to obtain tumor measurements, many of these involving five to 10 bidimensional calculations per study. A mean of 101 new examinations per day was performed by radiologists during the same 12-month period, including cross-sectional studies (CT and US scans) (56%), plain radiographs (34%), and mammograms (11%). MR imaging was not performed.
Conclusion: Second-opinion consultations increased the average daily work volume by 18%. This has implications for workforce, as well as for compensation in terms of relative value units and finances for this previously unquantified service.