Main Logo
Logo

Society for Pediatric Radiology – Poster Archive

  173
  0
  0
 
 


Final ID: Paper #: 174

A Needs Assessment of Pediatric Neuroradiology Training: Survey of Practicing Pediatric Radiologists

Purpose or Case Report: Both neuroradiologists and pediatric radiologists require unique skills to confidently manage pediatric neuroradiology cases either in a community setting, or in a specialized pediatric tertiary care hospital. We conducted a needs assessment of pediatric radiologists to define their neuroradiology subspecialty training experience and identify perceived skills and knowledge gaps as well as their attitudes toward a customized pediatric neuroradiology curriculum.
Methods & Materials: A comprehensive anonymous needs assessment survey was developed and distributed electronically in July 2019 to 175 SPR members who were current fellows or recent graduates from programs from 2014 to 2019. Members were given approximately 1.5 months to respond and two reminders were electronically delivered prior to survey closing. Eight questions addressed demographics, percent time interpreting neuroradiology and value of training in preparing them for neuroradiology practice. A qualitative description included percentages for both categorical and continuous variables.
Results: 57 pediatric radiologists (1 fellow and 56 attendings) responded to the survey (33%). Sixty-three percent were fellowship trained only in general pediatrics, and 16% were trained in both peds and neuroradiology. Seventy-five percent performed some pediatric neuroradiology. For all practice types, 22% spent greater than 50% of their time reporting pediatric neuroradiology studies. During residency, the majority (71.4%) reported 4 weeks or less of pediatric neuroimaging, whereas 21.4% reported >10 weeks. During fellowship 30.4% reported 4 weeks or less while 32% reported >10 weeks training. Respondents reported adequate training in general image interpretation including emergency pediatric neuroimaging (75%), pediatric neuropathology on CT (73%), and imaging specifically related to nonaccidental trauma in pediatric neuroimaging (68%). Fifty percent or greater reported limited or no instruction in 5 areas of image interpretation (fetal, ENT, oncology, embryology, spectroscopy); 4 technical skills (image quality, reducing imaging time, choice of contrast agents, sedation) and understanding clinical management pathways.
Conclusions: Most pediatric radiologists will need interpretation and technical skills in pediatric neuroimaging. Training programs vary widely in the dedicated time and content offered in pediatric neuroimaging rotations. A standardized pediatric neuroradiology fellowship curriculum is warranted to fully prepare graduates for practice.
  • Gokli, Ami  ( Children's Hospital of Philadelphia , Philadelphia , Pennsylvania , United States )
  • Shekdar, Karuna  ( Children's Hospital of Philadelphia , Philadelphia , Pennsylvania , United States )
  • Reid, Janet  ( Children's Hospital of Philadelphia , Philadelphia , Pennsylvania , United States )
Session Info:

Scientific Session VI-C: Informatics Education

Informatics, Education, QI, or Healthcare Policy

SPR Scientific Papers

Preview
Paper____174.pdf
You have to be authorized to contact abstract author. Please, Login or Signup.

Please note that this is a separate login, not connected with your credentials used for the SPR main website.

Not Available

Comments

We encourage you to join the discussion by posting your comments and questions below.

Presenters will be notified of your post so that they can respond as appropriate.

This discussion platform is provided to foster engagement, and stimulate conversation and knowledge sharing.

Please click here to review the full terms and conditions for engaging in the discussion, including refraining from product promotion and non-constructive feedback.

 

You have to be authorized to post a comment. Please, Login or Signup.

Please note that this is a separate login, not connected with your credentials used for the SPR main website.


   Rate this abstract  (Maximum characters: 500)