Current Clinical Practice Patterns of Self-Identified Interventional Radiologists

Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess patterns of procedural, clinical evaluation and management (E/M), and diagnostic imaging services rendered by self-identified interventional radiologists (IRs) across the United States.

Materials and methods: Recent Medicare Physician and Other Supplier Public Use and Physician Compare national downloadable files were linked. IRs were defined as physicians self-identifying interventional radiology as their primary specialty on Medicare claims or as a specialty during Medicare enrollment. The primary outcome measure was percentage of work (in work relative value units [WRVU]) attributed to interventional services (both procedural and E/M) per IR. Secondary outcome measures included sociodemographic factors per interventional WRVU quartile and percentage of E/M service units per IR. Statistical analysis included chi-square and t tests and logistic regression.

Results: Overall, 3132 physicians nationally self-identified to Medicare as IRs. The distribution of WRVU attributed to interventional services was strongly bimodal. Procedures and E/M together accounted for ≥ 91% and ≤ 5% of total work for the most and least intervention-oriented quartiles, respectively, but were widely distributed in the middle two quartiles. The most intervention-oriented self-identified IRs were more likely out of medical school ≤ 30 years (odds ratio [OR], 2.5; p < 0.0001), men (OR, 2.2; p < 0.0001), and in academic practice (OR, 4.3; p < 0.0001). E/M accounted for only 1.4% of all billed services.

Conclusion: Although most self-identified IRs perform both interventional and diagnostic imaging services, the subspecialty distribution is strongly bimodal, one-quarter each focusing ≤ 5% and ≥ 91% of work on interventional services. Despite ongoing emphasis on clinically focused interventional radiology, E/M services remain rarely reported.