Call Burden and Compensation Disparities in Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology

A recent JVIR survey of interventional radiologists describes measurable differences in call burden, remote-work feasibility, and compensation approaches between diagnostic and interventional radiologists amid workforce and coverage pressures.

The survey included Society of Interventional Radiology members, with roughly 800 respondents and a 24% response rate. About 67% of respondents reported receiving some form of call compensation, described as either direct monetary payment or “time for time.” Time-for-time arrangements—extra days off in exchange for additional hours—were reported by about 12% of respondents.

Variation by practice setting is also highlighted, particularly in whether call is compensated with direct pay. Monetary payment for call was reported more often among private-practice respondents, with about 76% receiving call pay compared with about 43% in other settings. The likelihood of on-call pay increased with greater call frequency across practice settings.

The investigators call for clearer definitions of practice environments, a broader understanding of compensation mechanisms, and more equitable expectations for interventional radiology call across settings.