Thy Nguyen1, Deepa Dongarwar2, Kristin Brown3, Suur Biliciler3
1University of Texas Health Science Center, 2Department of Neurology, McGovern Medical School, 3Neurology, UT Houston
Objective:
This study presents results from a survey of physicians who perform electromyography studies to assess average volume and factors impacting volume of studies.
Background:
Productivity is an important factor for physicians in many types of practice. However, unlike evaluation and management services for neurologists, there are no published data regarding benchmarks of average quantity of electrodiagnostic studies performed.
Design/Methods:
This survey was considered IRB exempt by UT Houston medical school. This anonymous survey was sent out via QR code or hyperlink to multiple online neurology, electromyography and neuromuscular forums.
Results:
During interim analysis, 118 respondents had initiated the survey. Only respondents who completed the survey and performed EMGs were analyzed. 80% were board certified through adult neurology, 11.7% though physical medicine and rehabilitation and 1.8% through pediatric neurology. 48% practiced in academic medicine and the remaining 52% were private practice, group, solo, hospital employed or other. 83% of respondents allotted a dedicated half-day to performing EMGs. The median number of EMGs scheduled during a half-day was 3-4 (44%). 33% and 6.7% scheduled 5-6 or more than 7 patients per half day respectively. The median number of EMGs performed per year were 251-500 (37%). 43% of respondents worked with trainees. Of those respondents, 96% work with residents 57% work with fellows. In regards to how trainees impact productivity, half of respondents felt there was no change. When working with trainees, 40% (residents) and 14% (fellows) felt they needed to see fewer patients and 0% (residents) and 22% (fellows) felt they could see more patients.
Conclusions:
To our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate average metrics of EMG productivity and complex factors that impact volume. Current productivity measures are limited to evaluation and management services. Additionally, these measures do not consider complex factors that may impact individual physician productivity.