Assessing medical students' knowledge of IR at two American medical schools.

PURPOSE: To determine if there was a difference in the level of knowledge about interventional radiology (IR) between medical students in preclinical years of training compared with medical students in clinical years of training at two medical schools and to compare awareness of IR based on the curriculum at each school: one with required radiology education and one without such a requirement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An anonymous survey was distributed to students at two medical schools; the survey assessed knowledge of IR, knowledge of training pathways, and preferred methods to increase exposure. Responses of the preclinical and clinical groups were compared, and responses from the clinical groups at each school were compared. RESULTS: "Poor" or "fair" knowledge of IR was reported by 84% (n = 217 of 259) of preclinical students compared with 62% of clinical students (n = 110 of 177; P < .001). IR was being considered as a career by 11% of all students (15%, n = 40 of 259 preclinical; 5%, n = 9 of 177 clinical). The main reason respondents were not considering IR was "lack of knowledge" (65%, n = 136 of 210 preclinical; 20%, n = 32 of 162 clinical). Students in the clinical group at the institution with a required radiology rotation reported significantly better knowledge of IR than clinical students from the institution without a required clerkship (P = .017). CONCLUSIONS: There are significant differences in knowledge of IR between preclinical and clinical students. Required radiology education in the clinical years does increase awareness of IR.

Duke Scholars

Author Waleska Michelle Pabon-Ramos Radiology, Interventional Radiology