Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “ACRs”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 199 records · Page 11Linked to original sources

Hospital activities of radiology groups in the United States: results of a 1992 ACR survey.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the hospital activities of radiology groups in the United States, including the characteristics of hospitals at which groups practice, workload and staffing at these hospitals, and groups' professional and business arrangements at these hospitals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The American College of Radiology surveyed a stratified random sample of radiology groups, defining a radiology group as any practice with two or more radiologists or radiation oncologists, including private groups, academic or multispecialty groups, and staffs of government facilities. All groups were directed to complete a detailed, two-page hospital information sheet (HIS) for each hospital at which they practiced. Sixty-nine percent of groups responded, and we obtained HISs for 86% of their hospitals. These responses were weighted to make our results representative of all U.S. hospitals at which radiology groups practice. RESULTS: Radiology groups reported performing on average 47,800 diagnostic procedures annually at hospitals. The average number of diagnostic procedures (inpatient plus outpatient) performed was 0.8 per inpatient day. This number varied greatly from hospital to hospital. A full-time equivalent (FTE) diagnostic radiologist at a hospital performed on average 11,400 procedures annually. Again, variation was large; the 25th percentile was 7000 procedures annually per FTE, and the 75th percentile was 14,100 procedures. Radiation oncology services were mainly provided at larger hospitals (more than 300 beds). On average, the annual number of new oncology patients at hospitals offering radiation oncology services was 380, and these patients received an average of 8435 fractions. Groups accepted nonreferred patients for mammography at 42% of hospitals at which they provided diagnostic services, and they provided 24-hr coverage for diagnostic radiology at 80% of the hospitals at which they provided diagnostic services. CONCLUSIONS: Radiologists can use the findings from this survey to evaluate their hospital practice. The workload data show considerable variation, and averages should not be taken as standards.

Accounts Payable and Receivable↗

ACR survey results: diagnostic imaging scientists and engineers.

The American College of Radiology's Committee on Physics Resources of the Commission on Human Resources conducted a survey of diagnostic imaging scientists and engineers to assess who is providing radiologic physics and related services in diagnostic imaging departments. The survey forms were distributed through the members of the American Healthcare Radiology Administrators. Survey results showed a predominance of M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in physics and medical/radiological physics. Nearly all respondents had their time split between numerous categories of work, such as clinical and research, and between different modalities such as diagnostic x-ray, nuclear medicine and radiation oncology. To enhance physics services in important areas such as CT, which currently receive little time, support is needed for work prioritization, for training, and for positions for physics and physics-support personnel.

Certification↗

The ACR Practice Accreditation Program for radiation oncology.

Quality assurance, an issue receiving great attention in medicine of late, has its origins in the consumerism of the mid 60's and in the budgetary problems which became more pronounced following the oil embargo of the 1970's. Consumerism, initially concerned with product safety, eventually extended to the patient/doctor relationship. Physicians became providers of healthcare, and as such were increasingly viewed as liable for the results of that care. A bad result implied bad care. The rate of malpractice claims began to increase, with a concomitant increase in malpractice insurance premiums. This upward pressure on medical costs came at a time of economic crisis, related in part to increasing oil costs, competition from foreign manufacturers, and rising national debt. It was inevitable, therefore, that those who pay for medical care (private insurers and the government) would look for ways to ensure that the care they were buying was both necessary and of good quality.

Accreditation↗