Radiology Department Efficiency

 

Dr. Emrick's books, Blogs, and Podcasts

Radiology Department Efficiency

Radiology departments in multi-hospital health systems face pressure to deliver fast, high-quality imaging services efficiently. Key performance indicators (KPIs) are measurable metrics that radiology leaders use to gauge performance and drive improvements in radiology. By systematically tracking KPIs, departments can enhance patient care, streamline workflows, optimize resource use, and ensure they meet organizational goals for service and cost. I present five of the most commonly used radiology KPIs and examine how each contributes to department efficiency. Also, I present case studies from healthcare systems and demonstrate how these KPIs can be implemented, followed by best practices and actionable recommendations for radiology directors. While not all-inclusive, the top five KPIs commonly used in radiology are report turnaround time, image volume and throughput, equipment utilization, diagnostic report accuracy, and patient satisfaction. Let me provide an overview of each metric. For a detailed understanding of radiology management, you can find a two-volume set of published books via my website. https://kellyemrick.com.

Report Turnaround Time (TAT): Turnaround time measures the interval from imaging exam completion to the finalized radiology report availability. It is one of radiology's most widely monitored KPIs because timely reports are critical for patient management and referring physician satisfaction​. Faster TAT improves clinical decision-making speed and patient throughput, directly boosting operational efficiency. Hospital administrators often include report TAT in quality targets, as delays can bottleneck care and impact patient length of stay​. The radiology director can expand this metric by investigating the time it takes for the patient to get a scheduled exam.

Imaging Volume and Throughput: Volume refers to the number of imaging studies or patients served over a period. Tracking exam volume and throughput trends helps radiology leaders understand demand and capacity​. This KPI informs staffing and scheduling decisions to ensure the department can handle peak workloads efficiently. Aligning resources with volume optimizes scanner utilization and minimizes patient wait times. Regular volume monitoring also reveals growth opportunities or seasonal variations, enabling proactive planning​.

Equipment Utilization: Equipment utilization is a metric of how fully imaging machines (MRI, CT, etc.) are used relative to their available operating time. It’s a primary indicator of operational efficiency for costly imaging technology​. High utilization (without compromising service quality) means the department maximizes throughput for each scanner investment. Low utilization may indicate scheduling and technologist staffing inefficiencies, maintenance downtime, or excess capacity. Monitoring this KPI helps in capacity planning, optimizing operating hours, and scheduling preventative maintenance to minimize downtime​.

Diagnostic Report Accuracy (Quality): Report accuracy tracks the quality of radiologists’ interpretations, often via peer review discrepancy rates or compliance with quality standards. While accuracy can be more complex to quantify than time or volume, it is arguably the KPI with the most significant impact on patient outcomes and downstream costs​. High diagnostic accuracy avoids costly errors, such as unnecessary follow-up scans or treatments caused by misdiagnosis​. Radiology groups commonly implement quality assurance programs to review cases and measure error rates, aiming to keep significant discrepancies low (e.g., under 2%) and continuously improve interpretive performance​.

Patient Satisfaction (and Referring Physician Satisfaction): Patient satisfaction is typically measured via post-visit surveys (e.g., Press Ganey) focusing on aspects like wait times, staff communication, and overall experience in radiology. This KPI reflects service quality from the patient’s perspective​. High satisfaction scores can improve a department’s reputation and are increasingly tied to reimbursement incentives under value-based care​. In radiology, referring physician satisfaction is equally vital – referring clinicians expect prompt, accurate reports and responsive service. Satisfied patients and referrers are likelier to trust and utilize the radiology department, driving volume and efficiency in the long run​. Now, allow me to pivot and examine how large multi-hospital systems and networks have applied these KPIs to improve radiology efficiency, with a real-world example for each KPI:

Case Study 1: Reducing Turnaround Time through Subspecialty Workflow: A multi-center radiology network covering 11 hospitals sought to improve its report turnaround times. The network transitioned from a decentralized, modality-based reporting system at each hospital to a centralized subspecialized reporting model. The impact was significant – overall radiology report TAT decreased across the system, with especially notable improvements at the smaller community hospitals in the network​. For example, median report turnaround for final readings dropped from 119 minutes to 47 minutes, and the 80th-percentile (slowest) TAT improved from nearly 5 hours to under 3 hours after the change​. Every imaging modality saw TAT gains under the new model. By leveraging subspecialty radiologists reading for all sites, the network eliminated backlogs and ensured even the lower-volume hospitals received faster report turnarounds. This case demonstrates that actively managing the TAT KPI (through process redesign or technology) can standardize timely service across a multi-hospital enterprise, thus improving patient flow and referring physician satisfaction system-wide.

Case Study 2: Optimizing Volume and Staffing Efficiency at Scale (Children’s Hospital Network). A large children's hospital, part of a broader pediatric network, used data-driven volume metrics to become a top performer in radiology staffing efficiency​. Through the Children’s Hospital Association’s PROSPECT benchmarking program (which compared data across many pediatric hospitals), the children’s radiology department identified best practices to handle high patient volumes without adding staff. Leaders began holding weekly operational meetings (instead of monthly) to review patient volume trends and adjust staffing schedules in real time​. They developed dashboards to monitor daily imaging volumes and modality-specific demand, then aligned technologist shifts to match peak times​. For instance, analysis of volume patterns showed mid-morning and early afternoon peaks, leading to staggered shifts that ensured 9–11 technologists were on duty during the busiest hours, avoiding bottlenecks​. The children’s hospital also addressed throughput losses from no-shows by measuring appointment cancellation and no-show rates. Automated reminders and a patient-facing scheduling chatbot were introduced to improve appointment adherence​. As a result, even as volumes returned to near-normal after a COVID-related drop, the hospital maintained productivity by flexibly reallocating existing staff and saw sustained high throughput without compromising service​. This case illustrates how closely tracking volume KPIs and related metrics (like no-show rates) across a system allows for nimble, efficient resource management in response to fluctuating demand.

Case Study 3: Increasing Equipment Utilization via Centralized Asset Management: A large healthcare system in the northeast, 13 hospitals, recognized that inconsistent maintenance and service workflows hamper imaging equipment availability and utilization. The hospitals partnered to centralize and standardize its radiology equipment service program​ in a system-wide initiative. They established a unified maintenance plan and service request platform across all hospitals, replacing the patchwork of vendor processes​. Highly skilled in-house imaging engineers were deployed regionally to reduce reliance on external service contracts, with a guaranteed 1-hour response time for critical equipment issues (significantly faster than the previous vendor response)​. This standardization eliminated extended downtimes that had idled scanners and led to suboptimal utilization. Ensuring that MRI and CT machines are up and running promptly meant more scan slots could be filled daily, boosting effective utilization rates. The results included a 30% annual cost savings by cutting expensive OEM service contracts and downtime while improving “customer” satisfaction by 23% (measured via internal client feedback from hospital staff) due to quicker fixes and first-time resolution of issues​. This multi-hospital case shows that treating equipment uptime and utilization as a KPI and addressing its drivers (maintenance speed, standard processes, parts availability) yields both efficiency and financial gains for the radiology service line.

Case Study 4: Enhancing Diagnostic Accuracy through Quality Programs: A large radiology physician consortium of 17 radiology practices serving over 120 hospitals nationwide provides a compelling example of leveraging accuracy metrics to improve performance. The consortium formed a federally certified Patient Safety Organization (PSO) to aggregate and analyze quality data (such as peer review findings and error rates) from all member practices​. The multi-hospital group sought to identify systemic weaknesses and best practices that individual sites might miss by pooling data on diagnostic discrepancies and near-misses. Early on, leadership noted that while every member touted high accuracy, measurement was inconsistent​. Through the PSO, they set standard benchmarks, ensuring each practice performs secondary readings on at least a certain percentage of cases and keeps serious misinterpretation rates below 2%​. One member hospital that adopted a new peer review system saw its case review volume rise to nearly 5% of all studies (well above the 1% ACR minimum) while maintaining significant error rates under 1%​. Across the consortium, an emphasis on sub-specialty readings for complex cases has also been associated with improved accuracy​. This radiology case study highlights that a shared focus on report accuracy KPIs (and transparent sharing of performance data) can elevate diagnostic quality even across multiple independent hospitals. This reduces repeat imaging and prevents the downstream inefficiencies and costs associated with errors​.

Case Study 5: Improving Patient Satisfaction Scores with Service Initiatives: A major academic center in the northeast undertook a multifaceted quality improvement program to raise its outpatient radiology patient satisfaction scores. Despite high clinical performance, the hospital’s baseline patient experience percentile ranking was mediocre (35th percentile nationally). Radiology leadership implemented four key changes: (1) educating all radiology staff about the importance of patient experience, (2) providing staff with ID badges listing key patient service behaviors, (3) forming a patient experience committee to review feedback monthly, and (4) tracking survey scores and comments on an interactive “heat map” dashboard accessible to managers​. Throughout this initiative, the department’s Press Ganey satisfaction score improved from 92.8 to 93.6 (out of 100), and its national ranking rose to the 50th percentile​. Even a slight uptick in raw scores translated into a 15-point jump in percentile rank, demonstrating how focused efforts on patient-centric service can yield substantial reputational gains​. Negative comments on surveys also declined by about 1.4%​. The improvements were sustained by continuously sharing the patient feedback data with frontline staff and celebrating progress. This case highlights that monitoring patient satisfaction as a KPI and acting on the insights (e.g., communication, wait time reduction, staff courtesy) leads to concrete improvements in service quality. Similar tactics can be deployed at scale in a multi-hospital system to ensure consistent, high-standard patient experience in every radiology department. In the final section, I analyze these case studies, revealing several best practices for using KPIs to improve the radiology department's efficiency across hospitals:

• Use Data Dashboards for Real-Time Monitoring: Successful institutions invest in KPI dashboards that consolidate data from multiple sites, enabling leaders to spot issues and act quickly. For example, a prominent academic healthcare system in the Midwest developed an enterprise radiology dashboard to visualize exam volumes, report completion times, and ED turnaround times across academic and community hospitals. This dashboard helped redistribute workloads and balance resources in real time​. Radiology directors should ensure key metrics are accessible daily (or on demand) for timely decision-making.
• Align Staff and Schedules with Demand Patterns: High-performing departments regularly compare imaging volumes to staffing levels and adjust accordingly​. As seen in the children’s hospital case study, analyzing hourly and daily volume trends led to staggered technologist shifts that covered peak times without overstaffing low-volume periods​. Flexibility in scheduling (e.g., rotating weekend coverage, 10- or 12-hour shifts) can dramatically improve efficiency and staff morale. The best practice is to review volume KPIs at least weekly and involve frontline staff in optimizing schedules to match patient needs.
• Implement Standardized Protocols System-Wide: In multi-hospital systems, variability is the enemy of efficiency. Standardizing workflows and protocols across sites for exam scheduling, patient prep, image acquisition, and reporting can reduce errors and delays. The multihospital system experience of unifying equipment service processes across 13 hospitals demonstrates the value of system-wide standards – it eliminated confusion and duplicate efforts, leading to faster turnaround on fixes and more uptime​. Likewise, establishing uniform report turnaround expectations or quality criteria across all hospitals in a network ensures a consistent performance baseline.
• Invest in Technology and Subspecialty Resources: Technology can amplify KPI improvements. Examples include AI-based worklist tools to prioritize urgent cases and reduce TAT or centralized image-sharing systems that enable load balancing of reads among radiologists. The 11-hospital network cut turnaround times by pooling subspecialty radiologists and leveraging a unified RIS/PACS system for faster reading across sites​. Similarly, the radiology group's central PSO database allowed advanced analytics on error trends that no single practice could achieve alone​. Health systems should consider enterprise solutions. Whether it is workflow software, teleradiology networks, or analytics platforms that support their KPI goals at scale.
• Foster a Culture of Continuous Quality Improvement: A strong culture around KPIs is a common thread in the case studies. Departments that improved had leadership and staff jointly engaged in reviewing performance and solving problems. For instance, the extensive health system in the Midwest held monthly feedback meetings and created visual tools (heat maps) to keep everyone focused on patient satisfaction metrics​. In another case, a radiology and transport staff collaborated using Lean methods to drastically cut transport times and inpatient scan delays, showing how cross-department teamwork on shared KPIs can yield significant efficiency gains​. The best practice is to make KPI review a routine part of operations (e.g., include metrics in staff huddles and post dashboards in common areas) and empower staff to suggest improvements.
• Benchmark and Share Best Practices Across Sites: Multi-hospital systems should use their scale by comparing KPI performance across facilities and learning from the top performers. A large healthcare system benefited from an external benchmarking program (with peer hospitals) to gauge its efficiency​. Internal benchmarking can be equally powerful within a health system. If one campus has outstanding MRI utilization or the lowest wait times, study their methods and replicate them elsewhere. Some systems form internal quality councils or use scorecards to spur friendly competition on KPIs. The radiology consortium’s approach of sharing data and best practices among 120 hospitals is a prime example of how benchmarking drives improvement​.

Based on my professional experience, case study examples, and use of best practices, the following are my actionable recommendations to assist radiology directors in improving departmental efficiency using KPIs:

1. Establish a Core KPI Dashboard: Implement a dashboard that tracks the five core KPIs – report TAT, exam volume, equipment utilization, report accuracy (QA), and patient satisfaction – for each site in your system. Update it daily or weekly and review it in management meetings. This transparency will highlight where immediate attention is needed (e.g., a modality with rising backlogs or a drop in satisfaction scores)​.
2. Set Targets and Monitor Trends: Define specific performance targets for each KPI (e.g., average report TAT < 24 hours for routine studies, MRI utilization >85% of capacity, <1% significant discrepancy rate on reports, patient satisfaction ≥90th percentile). Use historical data and industry benchmarks to set realistic goals. Monitor trends over time rather than single points – a consistent upward trend in CT volume, for instance, might signal the need for additional scanner hours or staff even if current metrics seem acceptable.
3. Identify Bottlenecks and Interventions: Drill into KPI data to find where inefficiencies lie, then launch focused improvement projects. If turnaround times lag in the ED during overnight hours, analyze the workflow and consider solutions like adding an overnight radiologist or implementing preliminary reads by qualified personnel​. If equipment utilization is low, investigate scheduling practices or downtime causes – perhaps extend operating hours or improve maintenance response as illustrated in the above case study. Treat each KPI shortfall as a problem-solving opportunity, using methods like Lean/Six Sigma or rapid cycle tests of change.
4. Engage Multidisciplinary Teams: Involve radiologists, technologists, nurses, front desk staff, and referring clinicians in KPI improvement efforts. Frontline insights are invaluable for solutions. For example, technologists at the children’s helped redesign work shifts after volume reports pinpointed a mismatch in coverage​. Another case study included input from patient experience leaders outside of radiology to improve satisfaction processes​. Form cross-functional teams for each major initiative (e.g., a turnaround time task force, a patient experience committee) to ensure all perspectives are considered when implementing changes.
5. Leverage Systemness – Share and Standardize: As a radiology director in a multi-hospital system, promote sharing innovations and standardizing best practices across your sites. If one hospital develops an effective MRI schedule template or a successful peer learning program, roll it out system-wide with necessary local tweaks. Standardize protocols where possible – for instance, a single uniform critical results communication policy and tracking system can improve quality and consistency. Use the network’s collective data to identify “bright spots” and have those site leaders mentor others. Regularly communicate KPI achievements and lessons learned across the system, creating a culture of collective improvement rather than silos​.
6. Focus on Training and Accountability: Ensure staff are trained on clinical skills, the importance of KPIs, and how they can impact them. For instance, train radiologists on efficient reporting practices and use peer review data to provide feedback on accuracy. Trained technologists on proper scheduling and booking to maximize scanner use. Tie some portion of performance evaluations or incentives to KPI outcomes to foster accountability. However, balance this with support – give teams the tools (additional training, better software, adequate staffing) needed to succeed against their targets.
7. Celebrate Improvements and Iterate: When KPI metrics improve, acknowledge and celebrate those wins with your team. This reinforces the value of the effort and motivates further engagement. In one case study, the team saw pride in moving their patient satisfaction percentile upwards​, and the radiology/transport team celebrated sustaining their throughput gains for months​. Lastly, recognize that efficiency improvement is continuous. Use each measurement cycle to identify the next opportunity. KPIs will help your department sustain gains and pursue new benchmarks as technology and clinical needs evolve. Regular re-evaluation of which KPIs matter most to your radiology department’s strategic goals is also advisable, ensuring you adapt to healthcare priorities.

Radiology directors can substantially improve departmental efficiency and service quality by rigorously tracking these key performance indicators and following the above practices. The case studies from multi-hospital settings show that whether it’s faster report delivery, higher throughput, better equipment usage, improved accuracy, or patient-centered care, a data-driven KPI approach is essential for continuous improvement in today’s radiology operations. Embracing KPIs as management tools will position radiology departments to deliver timely, high-value imaging services across all sites in a health system. The end result is a win-win: better patient outcomes and satisfaction and a more efficient, productive radiology service line that meets the institution’s performance and financial objectives.

References

Adenova, G., Kausova, G., Saliev, T., Zhukov, Y., Ospanova, D., Dushimova, Z., Ibrayeva, A., & Fakhradiyev, I. (2024). Optimization of radiology diagnostic services for patients with stroke in multidisciplinary hospitals. Materia Socio-Medica, 36(2), 160–172. https://doi.org/10.5455/msm.2024.36.160-172

McGrath, A. L., Dodelzon, K., Awan, O. A., Said, N., & Bhargava, P. (2022). Optimizing radiologist productivity and efficiency: Work smarter, not harder. European Journal of Radiology, 155, 110131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.110131

Verma, N., Pacini, G. S., Torrada, J. P., de Oliveira, D. M., Zanon, M., Marchiori, E., Mohammed, T. L., & Hochhegger, B. (2020). Subspecialized radiology reporting: productivity and impact on the turnaround times for radiology reports in a middle-income country. Radiologia Brasileira, 53(4), 236–240. https://doi.org/10.1590/0100-3984.2019.0089