Rationale and Objectives
Retention of academic faculty is a pressing issue for many radiology departments. The departure of junior faculty members to private practice may be driven in part by economics; however, the choice may be influenced by many other elements of faculty satisfaction. The purpose of this study was to evaluate how satisfied junior (assistant professors and instructors) and senior (associate professors and professors) faculty in an academic radiology department are with respect to their work and to determine which factors most affected the decision to stay in academics.
Materials and Methods
We conducted a survey of junior and senior faculty in the department of radiology. Questions included attitudes regarding work, home, and family issues. Among the 27 junior faculty (73%) who responded to the survey, 14 were instructors and 13 were assistant professors. Among the 11 senior faculty (21%) who responded to the survey, 3 were associate professors and 8 were professors.
Results
Academic radiology faculty are very happy with work and derive enjoyment and fulfillment from their work. The working week excluding call (average 52 hours) and including call (average 61 hours) was not regarded as too long. The average academic faculty works 72% clinical time (range 15% to 100%) and gets 0.96 day a week of professional development. Fifty-nine percent are funded at an average of 0.91 day a week. Forty-one percent are on tenure track, and of the remainder, 40% expressed a desire for tenure track. Fifty-five percent of faculty have mentors and 57% receive adequate mentoring. When it comes to teaching, 50% have enough time to teach juniors. Of the remainder, all but one cited high clinical workload as an impediment to teaching juniors. Forty-one percent of faculty reported not getting enough academic time. Fifty-nine percent felt pressure to publish and 34% felt pressure to obtain external funding. Seventy-six percent surveyed felt it has become more difficult to publish. The main reasons cited were increasing clinical workload (34%), higher standards required (25%), lack of academic time (25%), and institutional review board constraints (16%). Twenty-eight percent of faculty work on research projects during weekends, 25% during professional development time, and 21% on weekday evenings. However, 63% said they had too little time to spend at home, with family, or on hobbies. The main reasons cited were demands on time caused by clinical work (45%), research (42%), and teaching (24%). Fifty-three percent said that their work regularly causes conflicts at home.
Conclusions
The main reasons to stay in academics were the opportunity for teaching (68%), working with expert colleagues (58%), to pursue research (55%), and an interesting mix of cases (47%). Disincentives to stay in academics included insufficient financial remuneration (82%), the high clinical workload (45%), academic center “politics,” and the lack of academic time (42%).
Academic departments have three main obligations: clinical service, teaching, and research. The first obligation is clinical service and providing care of their patients. Academic radiology departments also provide clinical services to a large number of patients, many of whom have complicated disease processes and are of low income ( ).
Radiology services are becoming increasingly important as the practice of medicine becomes more dependent on imaging for diagnosis, treatment planning, therapy guidance, and disease monitoring. Thus, the clinical workload of radiologists, including academic radiologists, is gradually increasing ( ). Even highly successful academic radiology departments receive the majority of their revenues from patient care activities, and most radiology faculty are expected to generate clinical revenues far in excess of their own resource utilization in order to support other department activities such as research, education, and various administrative and overhead expenses ( ).
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Materials and methods
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Results
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Table 1
Demographics of the 38 Survey Participants
Demographics Number (Percentage) in Each Category Job title Professor 8 (21%) Associate professor 3 (7.9%) Assistant professor 13 (34.2%) Lecturer 14 (36.8%) Length of time at this academic institution Less than 1 year 1 (2.7%) Less than 5 years 23 (60.5%) Less than 10 years 2 (5.3%) More than 10 years 12 (31.6%) Full time or part time Full time 35 (92.1%) Part time 3 (7.9%) — — Gender Male 25 (65.8%) Female 13 (34.2%) — — Clinical or tenure track? Clinical track 22 (57.9%) Tenure track 16 (42.1%) — —
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Table 2
Questions Relating to Work Using a Four-Point Likert Scale
Work Questions Strongly Agree (%) Agree (%) Disagree (%) Strongly Disagree (%) Junior faculty: Does your work have meaning and purpose? 10 (37.0) 8 (29.6) 3 (11.1) 6 (22.2) Senior faculty: Does your work have meaning and purpose? 9 (81.8) 2 (18.2) 0 (0) 0 (0) Junior faculty: Do you enjoy your work? 12 (44.4) 12 (44.4) 3 (11.1) 0 (0) Senior faculty: Do you enjoy your work? 5 (45.5) 6 (54.5) 0 (0) 0 (0) Junior faculty: Do you feel valued at work? 5 (18.5) 13 (48.1) 5 (18.5) 4 (14.8) Senior faculty: Do you feel valued at work? 3 (27.3) 7 (63.6) 1 (9.1) 0 (0) Junior faculty: Are your work hours too long? 2 (7.4) 9 (33.3) 13 (48.1) 3 (11.1) Senior faculty: Are your work hours too long? 2 (18.2) 3 (27.3) 6 (54.5) 0 (0) Junior faculty: Do you work too hard? 1 (3.7) 9 (33.3) 15 (55.5) 2 (7.4) Senior faculty: Do you work too hard? 4 (36.4) 4 (36.4) 3 (27.3) 0 (0) Junior faculty: Do you do too much call? 0 (0) 3 (11.1) 18 (66.6) 6 (22.2) Senior faculty: Do you do too much call? 0 (0) 2 (18.2) 8 (72.7) 1 (9.1) Junior faculty: Does your work provide you with adequate pay and benefits? 0 (0) 3 (11.1) 17 (62.9) 7 (25.9) Senior faculty: Does your work provide you with adequate pay and benefits? 2 (18.2) 7 (63.6) 2 (18.2) 0 (0) Junior faculty: Do you get enough vacation time? 0 (0) 8 (29.6) 13 (48.1) 6 (22.2) Senior faculty: Do you get enough vacation time? 1 (9.1) 5 (45.5) 3 (27.3) 2 (18.2) Junior faculty: Do you get enough meeting time? 2 (7.4) 9 (33.3) 12 (44.4) 4 (14.8) Senior faculty: Do you get enough meeting time? 2 (18.2) 7 (63.6) 1 (9.1) 1 (9.1) Junior faculty: Do you get enough academic time? 1 (3.7) 9 (33.3) 10 (37.0) 7 (25.9) Senior faculty: Do you get enough academic time? 1 (9.1) 8 (72.7) 1 (9.1) 1 (9.1) Junior faculty: Do you feel pressure to publish? 9 (33.3) 10 (37.0) 9 (33.3) 1 (3.7) Senior faculty: Do you feel pressure to publish? 0 (0) 5 (45.5) 6 (54.5) 0 (0) Junior faculty: Do you feel pressure to get external funding? 2 (7.4) 9 (33.3) 15 (55.5) 1 (3.7) Senior faculty: Do you feel pressure to get external funding? 2 (18.2) 0 (0) 7 (63.6) 2 (18.2) Junior faculty: Do you regularly take work home? 9 (33.3) 10 (37.0) 8 (29.6) 0 (0) Senior faculty: Do you regularly take work home? 5 (45.5) 5 (45.5) 1 (9.1) 0 (0)
Table 3
Average Number of Hours Per Week, Hours on Call, Clinical Days, and Academic Days
Mean SD Minimum Maximum Hours worked per week excluding on call 52.2 10.7 25 65 Hours worked per week including on call 60.5 12.4 25 95 Percentage of time that is clinical 72.2 19.7 15 100 Percentage of academic days (nonfunded) 9.6 5.4 0 30 Percentage of funded days ⁎ 18.0 13.1 0 80
Values for time commitments for academic radiology faculty
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Table 4
Mentorship and Promotion
Mentorship and Promotion Questions Yes (%) No (%) Do you have a mentor? 21 (55.2) 17 (44.8) Do you have adequate mentorship? 16 (76.2) 5 (23.8) Do you think that the time to promotion is too long? 25 (65.8) 13 (34.2) Are you on tenure track? 16 (42.1) 22 (57.9) Would you like to be on tenure track? 9 (40.1) 13 (59.9) Do you have enough time to teach juniors? 20 (52.6) 18 (47.4)
Table 5
Frequencies of Reasons Given as Incentives to Stay in Academics
Reason Frequency (%) Teaching juniors 26 (68.4) Expert colleagues 22 (57.9) Ability to do research 21 (55.3) Available new technology 18 (47.3) Interesting case load 18 (47.3) Prestige 18 (47.3) Location 13 (34.2) Personal reason 9 (23.7) Workload (reduced clinical compared to private practice) 8 (21.1) (Having) academic time 7 (18.4)
Participants could give more than one reason.
Table 6
Frequencies of Reasons Given as Disincentives to Stay in Academics
Reason Frequency (%) Money (less than private practice) 31 (81.6) Promotion structure (too long) 13 (34.2) Academic time (insufficient) 16 (42.1) Workload (increased clinical) 17 (44.7) Politics (“academic institution”) 16 (42.1) Technology (either outdated or excessive new) 8 (21.1) Colleagues 5 (13.2) Research support (insufficient) 4 (10.5) Administration (excessive) 3 (7.9) Paperwork (too much) 3 (7.9)
Participants could give more than one reason.
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Table 7
Frequencies of Reasons Given for Why Academic Faculty Think it is Harder to Publish Nowadays
Reason Frequency (%) Clinical work load 26 (89.7) Higher standards 19 (65.5) Less academic time 19 (65.5) Institutional review board 12 (41.3)
Participants could give more than one reason.
Table 8
Frequencies of Times Given for When Academic Faculty Work on Their Research Projects
Reason Frequency (%) Weekends 28 (73.6) Academic time 25 (65.7) Evenings 21 (55.3) Lunchtime 17 (44.7) Workday 10 (26.3)
Participants could give more than one reason.
Table 9
Home and Family Questions
Home and Family Questions Yes (%) No (%) Do you have enough free time? 14 (36.8) 24 (63.2) Do you spend enough time with your family? 14 (36.8) 24 (63.2) Do you spend enough time at home? 14 (36.8) 24 (63.2) Does time spent in work cause conflict at home? 20 (52.6) 18 (47.4)
Table 10
Frequencies of Times Given for Why Academic Faculty Do Not Have Enough Free Time
Reason Frequency (%) Research 16 (42.1) Work 17 (44.7) Teaching 9 (23.7) Meetings 8 (21.1) Preparing conferences 5 (13.1)
Participants could give more than one reason.
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Discussion
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Study Limitations
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Conclusions
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
References
1. Taljanovic M.S., Hunter T.B., Krupinski E.A., et. al.: Academic radiology: The reasons to stay or leave. Acad Radiol 2003; 10: pp. 1461-1468.
2. Feng L., Ruzal- Shapeiro C.: Factors that influence radiologists career choices. Acad Radiol 2003; 10: pp. 45-51.
3. Dunnick N.R.: Deficiency or opportunity. Acad Radiol 2001; 8: pp. 693-695.
4. Collins J., Kazerooni E.A., Vydareny K.H., et. al.: Journal publications in radiologic education: A review of the literature, 1987–1997. Acad Radiol 2001; 8: pp. 31-41.
5. Collins J., Smith W.L.: Promotion based on teaching efforts requires ongoing documentation of scholarly teaching activities. Acad Radiol 2001; 8: pp. 771-776.
6. Gazelle G.S., Dunnick N.R.: Subsidizing radiology research. Acad Radiol 2002; 9: pp. 195-197.
7. Pisano E.D.: Time management 101. Acad Radiol 2001; 8: pp. 768-770.
8. Dunnick N.R.: ACR Intersociety Conference 2003: Radiologist assistants and other radiologist extenders. J Am Coll Radiol 2004; 1: pp. 386-391.
9. Bhargavan M., Sunshine J.H.: Workload of radiologists in the United States in 2002-2003 and trends since 1991-1992. Radiology 2005; 236: pp. 920-931.
10. Bhargavan M., Sunshine J.H.: Utilization of radiology services in the United States: Levels and trends in modalities, regions, and populations. Radiology 2005; 234: pp. 824-832.
11. Studer-Ellis E., Gold J.S., Jones R.F.: Trends in US medical school faculty salaries, 1988-1989 to 1998-1999. JAMA 2000; 284: pp. 1130-1135.
12. www.mgma.com . Accessed on July 14, 2006.
13. American Association of Medical Colleges: 2006. January
14. Chan W.C., Sunshine J.H., Kunkle L.N., et. al.: Characteristics of radiology groups and of diagnostic radiologists and radiation oncologists in different types of practices. Radiology 1998; 207: pp. 443-453.
15. Eschelman D.J., Sullivan K.L., Parker L., et. al.: The relationship of clinical and academic productivity in a university hospital radiology department. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000; 174: pp. 27-31.
16. Hunter T.B., Krupinski E., Hunt K.R., et. al.: Academic radiology and doctor discontent: The good news and the bad news. Acad Radiol 2001; 8: pp. 509-511.
17. Hillman B.J., Fajardo L.L., Witzke D.B., et. al.: Factors influencing the success of academic radiologists in publishing research. Investig Radiol 1989; 24: pp. 849-854.
18. Illes J., Glover G.H., Wexler L., et. al.: A model for faculty mentoring in academic radiology. Acad Radiol 2000; 7: pp. 717-724.
19. Vydareny K.H., Waldrop S.M., Jackson V.P., et. al.: The road to success: Factors affecting the speed of promotion of academic radiologists. Acad Radiol 1999; 6: pp. 564-569.
20. Herzberg F.: 1966.The World Publishing CompanyCleveland, NY
21. Adams J.S.: Inequity in social exchange. Adv Exp Soc Psych 1965; 2: pp. 267-300.
22. Alderson P.O., Bresolin L.B., Becker G.J., et. al.: Enhancing research in academic radiology departments: Recommendations of the 2003 Consensus Conference. Acad Radiol 2004; 11: pp. 951-956. Radiology 2004; 232: pp. 405-408. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 183: pp. 273-276.