Perceptions and Current Practices of Radiologist Assistants' Peer-Review Process.

Purpose: To explore the perceptions and current practices of radiologist assistants' peer-review process.

Methods: A 49-question, anonymous, online questionnaire was emailed to 133 radiologist assistants in the American Registry of Radiologic Technologists database. Descriptive statistics were used for data analyses.

Results: The survey response rate was 42.1% (56/133). Most respondents (62.5%) participated in peer review. Direct in-person observation (21.4%) was the most common process used for radiologist assistants. Radiologists (62.5%) and radiologist assistants (51.8%) were considered peers to perform peer review. Although respondents indicated individual feedback was given by letters or emails (16.1%), they preferred face-to-face or phone call discussions (39.3%). Most respondents (65.5%) did not have peer-review meetings for educational purposes. Most respondents (92.5%) agreed that participating in peer review would be beneficial to their professional and educational development (90%) and that learning from peer review would be worth their time (95%).

Discussion: Health care providers and organizations use peer review to identify practice variations, optimum care delivery, effective communication, and deficiencies in professionalism by comparing the peers' views on performance against accepted standards. In radiology, diagnostic and interventional radiologists routinely perform peer review, but no information exists on processes for radiology-specific advanced practice providers, particularly radiologist assistants.

Conclusion: Radiologist assistants were receptive to participating in peer review and saw it as beneficial for educational and professional development. Knowledge of current processes and perceptions allows for radiologist assistant-specific peer-review development.