While workflows change to balance growing demand for imaging studies with decreasing capacity, it is essential that patient care is not compromised. Radiology practices must be prepared to invest and adapt for the long term to ensure critical performance metrics remain solid in this volatile environment.

Since 2010, vRad has provided high-quality, free continuing medical education – but I’ve always thought that there was an opportunity to share more with the radiology community.

My background has allowed me to collect thousands of interesting cases, including many rare cases some radiologists may never have the chance to see in practice. This year we set out to share more cases than ever before by presenting this library of cases in a new interactive way, and on a new platform.

As part of our website refresh, I wanted to build upon the educational materials we already provide--such as CMEs and Industry webinars--by improving the way we present interesting cases.

Building upon the educational format I have developed for presentations, we hope to have built a tool that is educational and interactive. 

I dabble in many roles at vRad including study interpretation, client services, site visits, CME presentations, and quality assurance (QA) review. It is this last that I have chosen as the topic for my first blog. I, as all vRad radiologists, have felt the painful sting of a QA submission on more than one occasion and know that the awful experience has a powerful effect on both personal and professional pride.  The fact that our red RIS indicator is the same color as my early teachers' corrective pens helps to lessen the impact not at all.  I well remember my own response to my early QAs, and I have noticed a similar pattern in many colleagues in my years of QA review.  I have at last achieved some measure of peace with my own fallibility as well as a significant reduction in my own error rate and I would like to share the insight I believe is most responsible for that state.