New research reveals a 33.4 percent increase overall in turnaround times for radiologists in 2024 with over a 10 percent increase for computed tomography (CT) scans and nearly a doubling of turnaround time for ultrasound interpretation.
For the study, recently published in the Journal of the American College of Radiology, researchers provided an updated analysis to a study published earlier this year looking at radiology turnaround times for Medicare beneficiaries between 2014 to 2023.
Incorporating 2024 national Medicare fee-for-service data, the study authors reviewed turnaround times for interpretation of CT scans, MRIs, ultrasound images and X-rays.
What Kind of Radiology Turnaround Times Are We Seeing for Medicare Beneficiaries?
Between 2014 and 2024, there was a 177 percent increase overall in radiologist turnaround times with 92 percent of the increase occurring between 2022 and 2024, according to the study authors. For 2024, the researchers noted an overall 33.4 percent increase in turnaround times with a 49.1 percent increase for ultrasound interpretation and a 35.4 percent increase for X-ray review.
“With radiologists already in short supply, projected shortages in physician supply and rising imaging utilization, these results continue to raise concerns about the ability of the current and future radiologist workforce to meet the growing imaging demand in a timely manner,” noted lead study author Alexandra R. Drake, MPH, a senior economics and health services researcher at the Harvey L. Neiman Health Policy Institute in Reston, Virginia, and colleagues.
What May Contribute to CTs and MRIs Getting Reviewed More Quickly Than X-Rays and Ultrasound Images?
The study authors also observed 11.6 percent and 4.5 percent increases in turnaround time for interpretation of CT scans and MRIs, respectively. Practical considerations and increased urgency in certain patient populations are likely factors in the lower increases in turnaround times for advanced imaging in comparison to ultrasound and X-rays, according to the researchers.
“Differences in work relative value units favor radiologists prioritizing MR and CT over XR. Additionally, there may be differences in the relative requirement for prompt follow-up for oncology and surgery patients to have their imaging (most commonly CT followed by MRI) prioritized for interpretation before the patient’s next office visit,” pointed out Drake and colleagues.
Three Key Takeaways
• Turnaround times rose sharply across all modalities in 2024, with ultrasound and X-ray hit hardest. Overall turnaround time increased 33.4 percent, driven largely by a 49.1 percent jump for ultrasound and 35.4 percent for X-ray, far outpacing the increases seen for CT (11.6 percent) and MRI (4.5 percent).
• Prioritization patterns, not workload alone, likely explain the modality gap. Higher work RVUs for CT/MRI and the clinical urgency of oncology and surgical follow-up imaging may push radiologists toward interpreting advanced imaging faster, leaving ultrasound and X-ray interpretation comparatively deprioritized.
• The radiology workforce may be nearing capacity limits. Although the 2024 increase in turnaround times was smaller than 2023's 46.2 percent jump, and some mitigation strategies (retired radiologists returning, moonlighting, weekend coverage) may have helped to a certain degree, turnaround times still worsened. This suggests these measures aren't enough to offset growing imaging demand against a constrained supply of radiologists.
Are There Any Sustainable Solutions for Mitigating Longer Turnaround Times for Radiologists?
The researchers noted that the 33.4 percent overall increase in turnaround times in 2024 was lower than the reported increase in 2023 (46.2 percent). While the study authors suggested that reactivation of retired radiologists, radiologist moonlighting and radiologists working weekend hours may have had some impact, there was regardless a significant increase in turnaround time.
“Even if such measures were taken, they were not sufficient to prevent further worsening of turnaround times. As such, these findings support the possibility that the radiology workforce may be operating at or near maximum capacity, particularly if additional operational efforts have not been sufficient to fully mitigate turnaround time increases,” added Drake and colleagues.
(Editor’s note: For related content, see “Turnaround Times for Radiology Reports: What New Research Reveals,” “Emphasizing the Role of Interoperability in Improving Radiologist Workflow and Decision-Making in Rural Diagnostic Care” and “Navigating the Daunting Challenges and Potential Opportunities in Radiology.”)
In regard to study limitations, the authors acknowledged the observational nature of the study thwarts analysis into the causes of increased turnaround times. The researchers also noted that the turnaround times reported in the study were based on calendar days between imaging exams and radiologist interpretation.
