71 - Variations in Case Mix Among Private and Academic IR Practices
L. K. Oladini, M. Rezaee, A. Ganesh, S. Dybul, R. Hofmann
Purpose: National benchmarking data on percentage case mix between academic and private IR practices helps better anticipate needs for practice building in different practice environments.
Material and Methods: A 60 question descriptive survey was distributed to 3159 self-identified IRs listed on the Society of Interventional Radiologists (SIR) Doctor finder, with 194 responses (6.1% response rate). 181 unique practices were represented across 33 U.S. States, with 176 (66 academic and 110 private practices) providing information on case mix.
Results: Between academic and private practices, there was significant variation in reported case mix. The average estimated contribution of PAD to the procedure mix was significantly greater among private practices (7%) than among academic practices (3%) (p=0.006; n=176), with a similar difference for musculoskeletal intervention ([6%] vs [3 %] among private and academic practices respectively, n=174, [p < 0.001]). Dialysis circuit evaluation comprised a larger percentage of private IR practices as compared to academic IR practices ([10%] vs [6%], n=175, [p < 0.001]). Meanwhile, the opposite was true for interventional oncology work in private compared to academic practices [10%] vs [22%] for private and academic practices respectively, n=174, [p < 0.001]).
Conclusions: Peripheral arterial disease intervention, along with musculoskeletal and dialysis circuit intervention comprised significantly more private practice IR case mix than academic IR case mix. There may be opportunities for practice building in both academic and private practices where practice composition significantly differs from the average, if local politics and infrastructure allow. Furthermore, increased training exposure to PAD, musculoskeletal, and dialysis interventions could benefit future IR physicians interested in pursuing private practice.