Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/18416
Title: The future of interventional and neurointerventional radiology: learning lessons from the past.
Authors: Maingard, Julian;Kok, Hong Kuan;Ranatunga, Dinesh G;Brooks, Duncan Mark;Chandra, Ronil V;Lee, Michael J;Asadi, Hamed
Affiliation: Interventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia
Interventional Neuroradiology Service, Department of Radiology, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia
School of Medicine-Faculty of Health, Deakin University , Waurn Ponds, VIC , Australia
Department of Interventional Radiology, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust , London , UK
The Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, University of Melbourne , Melbourne , Australia
Department of Imaging, Monash University , Melbourne, VIC , Australia
Interventional Neuroradiology Unit-Monash Imaging, Monash Health , Melbourne, VIC , Australia
Interventional Radiology Service-Department of Radiology, Beaumont Hospital , Dublin , Ireland
Department of Radiology, Royal College of Surgeons , Dublin , Ireland
Issue Date: Dec-2017
EDate: 2017-10-03
Citation: The British journal of radiology 2017; 90(1080): 20170473
Abstract: The rapid progression of medical imaging technology and the ability to leverage knowledge from non-invasive imaging means that Interventional Radiologists (IRs) and Interventional Neuroradiologists are optimally placed to incorporate minimally invasive interventional paradigms into clinical management to advance patient care. There is ample opportunity to radically change the management options for patients with a variety of diseases through the use of minimally invasive interventional procedures. However, this will need to be accompanied by an increased clinical role of IRs to become active partners in the clinical management of patients. Unfortunately, the development of IR clinical presence has lagged behind and is reflected by declining rates of IR involvement in certain areas of practice such as vascular interventions. Current and future IRs must be willing to take on clinical responsibilities; reviewing patients in clinic to determine suitability for a procedure and potential contraindications, rounding on hospital inpatients and be willing to manage procedure related complications, which are all important parts of a successful IR practice. Increasing our clinical presence has several advantages over the procedure-driven model including enhanced patient knowledge and informed consent for IR procedures, improved rapport with patients and other clinical colleagues through active participation and engagement in patient care, visibility as a means to facilitate referrals and consistency of follow-up with opportunities for further learning. Many of the solutions to these problems are already in progress and the use of IR as a "hired gun" or "technician" is a concept that should be relegated to the past, and replaced with recognition of IRs as clinicians and partners in delivering modern high quality multidisciplinary team-based patient care. The following article will review the history of IR, the challenges facing this rapidly evolving profession and discuss recent developments occurring globally that are essential in maintaining expertise, securing future growth and improving patient outcomes in the modern multidisciplinary practice of medicine.
URI: http://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/18416
DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20170473
ORCID: 0000-0001-8958-2411
0000-0003-2475-9727
PubMed URL: 28972807
Type: Journal Article
Appears in Collections:Journal articles

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.