Skeletal Radiology

, Volume 45, Issue 4, pp 475–482 | Cite as

Survey of current trends in postgraduate musculoskeletal ultrasound education in the United States

  • Netanel S. BerkoEmail author
  • Shlomit Goldberg-Stein
  • Beverly A. Thornhill
  • Mordecai Koenigsberg
Scientific Article



To determine current trends in postgraduate musculoskeletal ultrasound education across various medical specialties in the United States.

Materials and methods

A survey regarding musculoskeletal ultrasound education was sent to all program directors for diagnostic radiology and physical medicine rehabilitation residency programs, as well as adult rheumatology and sports medicine fellowship programs in the United States. The survey, sent in July 2015, queried the presence of formal musculoskeletal ultrasound training, the components of such training and case volume for trainees.


Response rates were 23, 25, 28 and 33 % for physical medicine and rehabilitation, radiology, rheumatology and sports medicine programs, respectively. Among respondents, musculoskeletal ultrasound training was present in 65 % of radiology programs, 88 % of sports medicine programs, 90 % of rheumatology programs, and 100 % of physical medicine and rehabilitation programs. Most programs utilized didactic lectures, followed by hands-on scanning. The majority of programs without current training intend to implement such training within 5 years, although radiology programs reported the lowest likelihood of this happening. Most program directors believed that musculoskeletal ultrasound education is important for their trainees, and is of greater importance than it was 10 years ago. Case volume was lowest for radiology trainees and highest for sports medicine trainees.


Among respondents, the majority of diagnostic radiology programs offer musculoskeletal ultrasound training. However, this experience is even more widespread in other medical specialties, and hands-on training and experience tend to be greater in other specialties than in radiology.


Musculoskeletal ultrasound Education Residency Fellowship Curriculum 


Compliance with ethical standards

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

This articles does not contain patient data.


  1. 1.
    Klauser AS, Tagliafico A, Allen GM, et al. Clinical indications for musculoskeletal ultrasound: a Delphi-based consensus paper of the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology. Eur Radiol. 2012;22:1140–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sharpe RE, Nazarian LN, Parker L, Rao VM, Levin DC. Dramatically increased musculoskeletal ultrasound utilization from 2000 to 2009, especially by podiatrists in private offices. J Am Coll Radiol. 2012;9:141–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yablon CM, Wu JS, Newman LR, Downie BK, Hochman MG, Eisenberg RL. A needs assessment of musculoskeletal fellowship training: a survey of practicing musculoskeletal radiologists. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200:732–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Society of Skeletal Radiology website. MSK fellowships. Accessed November 22, 2015.
  5. 5.
    ACGME website. Number of accredited programs, academic year 2015–2016, United States. Accessed August 3, 2015
  6. 6.
    ACGME program requirements for graduate medical education in diagnostic radiology. Available at: Accessed August 3, 2015.
  7. 7.
    ACGME program requirements for graduate medical education in physical medicine and rehabilitation. Available at: Accessed August 3, 2015.
  8. 8.
    ACGME program requirements for graduate medical education in rheumatology (internal medicine). Available at: Accessed August 3, 2015.
  9. 9.
    Finnoff JT, Berkoff D, Brennan F, et al. American medical society for sports medicine recommended sports ultrasound curriculum for sports medicine fellowships. Br J Sports Med. 2015;49:145–50.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Luz J, Siddiqui I, Jain NB, et al. Resident-perceived benefit of a diagnostic and interventional musculoskeletal ultrasound curriculum: a multifaceted approach using independent study, peer teaching, and interdisciplinary collaboration. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;94:1095–103.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ahn JS, French AJ, Thiessen ME, Kendall JL. Training peer instructors for a combined ultrasound/physical exam curriculum. Teach Learn Med. 2014;26:292–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Knobe M, Münker R, Sellei RM, et al. Peer teaching: a randomised controlled trial using student-teachers to teach musculoskeletal ultrasound. Med Educ. 2010;44:148–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Klabunde CN, Willis GB, McLeod CC, et al. Improving the quality of surveys of physicians and medical groups: a research agenda. Eval Health Prof. 2012;35:477–506.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kellerman SE, Herold J. Physician response to surveys: a review of the literature. Am J Prev Med. 2001;20:61–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Martins Y, Lederman RI, Lowenstein CL, et al. Increasing response rates from physicians in oncology research: a structured literature review and data from a recent physician survey. Br J Cancer. 2012;106:1021–6.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shih TH, Fan X. Comparing response rates from web and mail surveys: a meta-analysis. Field Methods. 2008;20:249–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ISS 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Netanel S. Berko
    • 1
    Email author
  • Shlomit Goldberg-Stein
    • 1
  • Beverly A. Thornhill
    • 1
  • Mordecai Koenigsberg
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyMontefiore Medical CenterBronxUSA

Personalised recommendations