At the recent Radiological<\/a> Society of North America annual meeting, a Swiss researcher reported lagging interest from medical students in pursuing a radiology residency and career. She found that survey respondents<\/a> recognized radiology\u2019s importance but expressed a desire for more patient contact, among other reasons to bypass it.<\/p>\n So, while 99% of the 1184 respondents agreed that radiology is important in their future clinical practice, 64% ruled it out as a career.<\/p>\n However, three leading radiologists in the United States took issue with the survey, which included responses from 21 universities in Germany, Switzerland and Austria but not the United States. The scenario in the United States is very different, they told Medscape Medical News.<\/em> Among US medical students, interest in radiology residences \u2014 both interventional and diagnostic \u2014 is on the rise. But, despite the increased interest, radiologist shortage is ongoing. The limited number of residency positions, an increased demand for imaging services and an aging population are major reasons.<\/p>\n \u201cInterest in radiology by medical students is high, and matching into radiology is quite competitive,\u201d said James M. Milburn, MD, vice-chair of the Ochsner Health Department of Radiology, New Orleans, and professor of radiology at the University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. The number of applicants to radiology residency positions exceeds the number who get in, with the number of unmatched hopefuls on the rise, he said.<\/p>\n \u201cMany of the individuals not matching are very good applicants who could become fine radiologists,\u201d Milburn said.<\/p>\n \u201cIt has become difficult to get a radiology residency slot even for a US grad,\u2019\u2019 agreed Robert Min, MD, chair of radiology at Weill Cornell Medicine and New York-Presbyterian and president and CEO of the Weill Cornell Physician Organization. \u201cThe number of applicants for residencies has gone up, but the slots have not.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n When people apply for a specific specialty, it\u2019s often tied to the job market, he said, and the demand for radiologists is expected to increase.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s still a very attractive field,\u201d agreed Carolyn Meltzer, MD, a neuroradiologist and dean of the University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles. But \u201cwe aren\u2019t training enough [radiologists] to meet demand. If I were able to keep all the residents I train every year, it would take me several years to catch up to the need.\u201d<\/p>\n A recent Medscape<\/em> report found<\/a> that radiologists earn an average of nearly $500,000 a year, the sixth-highest average salary for a physician.<\/p>\n How severe is the shortage, and how much will demand for radiologists grow?<\/p>\n As of December 9, the American College of Radiology posted 1923 open radiology jobs.<\/a> In a 2024 report,<\/a> the American College of Radiology and the Radiology Business Management Association estimated a total shortage of 13,500 to 86,000 physicians by 2026; radiology falls in the \u201cother specialties\u201d category, which will face an estimated combined shortage of 19,500 physicians.<\/p>\n The Bureau of Labor Statistics<\/a> estimates that employment for radiologists will grow by 4% between 2023-2033, with 1200 new jobs added. The trend mirrors overall physician employment, which is also expected to grow by 4% in the time period. In comparison, growth of 2% is projected for general pediatricians and pediatric surgeons, 3% for obstetrician-gynecologists and general internal medicine physicians, 7% for dermatologists and neurologists, and 8% for psychiatrists.<\/p>\n Despite that rosy growth prediction, many applicants don\u2019t get past applying.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cIn 2023,<\/a> there were 1084 more applicants to diagnostic and interventional radiology than available positions, up from 570 excess applicants in 2020,\u201d Milburn said. In the 2024 National Resident Matching Program,<\/a> the applicants again outnumbered the matches.<\/p>\n \u201cThis makes people question why we do not simply increase the number of radiology positions available,\u201d Milburn said. \u201cThe reason is that the 1997 Balanced Budget Act placed a cap on the number of positions at each hospital, based on the total number of residents training there in 1996. Caps are allotted to hospitals, not [specific] residency programs.\u201d<\/p>\n Medicare is the largest funder of graduate medical education (GME) at public hospitals and Congress in the Balanced Budget Act sought to limit the cost of residency slots.\u00a0<\/p>\n Further, he said, \u201cThe vast majority of residency positions are funded by the government, and there has been little change in that number. Minor increases have come from additional caps at new teaching hospitals and a small increase that is being rolled out with the GME Enhancement<\/a> and Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021, but relatively few of the these are allocated to radiology.\u201d<\/p>\n When residency positions are increased in university and hospital systems, most are self-funded, Milburn said.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cMy own radiology department at the Ochsner Clinic has decided to self-fund two additional positions in recent years, and I believe this is an increasing trend in many hospitals. Because so many of our faculty hires arise from our own residencies, departments should consider [funding] resident positions as a good way to improve the future recruitment pool.\u201d<\/p>\n In 2023, the average annual compensation for residents was $67,400, according to a Medscape<\/em> survey.<\/a><\/p>\n According to Milburn, \u201cSelf-funding one spot starts at just one resident salary plus benefits the first year.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Of course, since it is a 4-year residency, this would increase.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cSo, each position would have the additive cost of a PG2, PG3, PG4, and PG5 resident salary plus benefits. That would probably be around $400,000 per additional position.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cWhile it\u2019s nice to say we should increase the number of slots, if the federal government isn\u2019t saying, \u2018Oh we are going to give out more,\u2019 then it\u2019s up to each system,\u201d Meltzer said.\u00a0<\/p>\n But there\u2019s not always much incentive, she said, because systems can\u2019t count on residents staying on as hires. Extra incentives, she said, such as offering a subspecialty opportunity in the last year of residency, or an offer to start a fellowship early might help, she said. However, \u201cyou can\u2019t force someone to hold to employment just because they trained at your institution.\u201d<\/p>\n In a bulletin posted on the American College of Radiology site, Alan H. Matsumoto, MD, chair of the ACR Board of Chancellors, proposed<\/a> a number of strategies, including enactment of the Resident Physician Shortage Reduction Act<\/a> (H.R. 2389\/S.1302)<\/a>, referred to the US House Subcommittee on Health in April 2023. It would increase the number of federally funded residency positions by 2000 annually for 7 years, or a total of 14,000.<\/p>\n Milburn and others say the benefits of making residents feel valued and like they belong should not be underrated.<\/p>\n \u201cResidencies should also create a positive environment in which their residents will want to practice in the future,\u201d Milburn said.<\/p>\n Min agreed and said he meets regularly with his residents, as a group, for a minimum of 90 minutes each month, and individually as the need arises. \u201cI interview every applicant. I believe [residents] are the foundation on which we build a great department. Making people feel valued, he said, pays off. Most of his residents stay on as faculty, Min said, even though Weill Cornell pays less than other institutions.<\/p>\n Despite the competitive atmosphere, what continues to attract medical students to a radiology residency?<\/p>\n Taking a radiology elective was most likely to spark interest in a radiology residency, according to a University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, study that polled 57 medical school graduates<\/a> who matched into a diagnostic or interventional radiology residency program. In recent years, mentors also matter. Of the 43 who responded, those who were to finish training in 2023 or later were more likely to say they were influenced by a mentor than those who finished before 2023.<\/p>\n Only a minority expressed concern about artificial intelligence having a negative impact on radiology. Remote reading had a positive impact, three of five said, citing it as a benefit towards a preferred lifestyle. Job satisfaction was rated high, 4.3 of 5.<\/p>\n Compensation likely plays a role. For average annual earnings, radiologists are in the top 20% of 29 specialties, coming in at number 6 with an annual average income of $498,000, according to the Medscape<\/em><\/a> Physician Compensation Report 2024<\/em>.<\/p>\n![\"Business](\"https:\/\/img.medscapestatic.com\/vim\/live\/professional_assets\/medscape\/images\/thumbnail_library\/ht_241210_james_milburn_120x156.jpg\")
Business Radiologists: Shortage & Projections<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Business Barriers: Lack of Slots<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Business How to Increase Radiology Residencies<\/strong><\/h2>\n
![\"Business](\"https:\/\/img.medscapestatic.com\/vim\/live\/professional_assets\/medscape\/images\/thumbnail_library\/ht_241210_robert_min_120x156.jpg\")
Business What Draws Med Students to Radiology?<\/strong><\/h2>\n