Our technology spans the patient journey to streamline processes and connect physicians, no matter where they are.
The radiologist’s workforce crisis exists because imaging demand is increasing faster than the supply of radiologists, and many organizations view teleradiology as an essential way to fill gaps. The lack of radiologists is driven by retirements, stagnant training capacity, geographic maldistribution, and rising subspecialty expectations. As a result, hospitals are increasingly experiencing delays, burnout, and coverage gaps.
Radiology’s workforce is contracting faster than new clinicians can enter the field. Over the past decade, the U.S. listed 31,825 radiologist job openings, yet residency programs produced only about 10,180 new diagnostic radiologists, a structural deficit of more than 21,000 positions. Subspecialties like neuroradiology show the widest mismatch, with hundreds more job openings than fellowship graduates.
This imbalance is worsening. The Neiman Health Policy Institute reports that radiologist attrition has been ~50% higher since 2020.
These gaps are driven by demographics, not temporary hiring fluctuations. Even under optimistic projections, workforce growth is expected to lag behind imaging demand through 2055.
If imaging keeps increasing but radiologist supply doesn’t, who fills the gap?
The radiologist workforce crisis is being driven by four converging pressures: imaging volumes are rising faster than staffing, radiologists are unevenly distributed across regions, subspecialty needs are growing while subspecialist supply is shrinking, and burnout is reducing overall productivity.
Together, these factors create persistent capacity gaps that affect the ability of health systems to keep pace with clinical demand.
Imaging volumes are increasing every year, and the growth rate now outpaces available radiologist capacity. CT volume has nearly doubled over a 20-year period, and MRI utilization increases between 4–7% annually. This utilization continues to rise across emergency, inpatient, and outpatient settings, driven by aging populations, chronic disease, and greater reliance on imaging for acute pathways like stroke and trauma.
This acceleration is consistent across health systems of all sizes. Community hospitals, rural facilities, and multisite networks all report sustained year-over-year growth. Without additional capacity, growing imaging demand intensifies existing challenges: burnout, backlogs, variable SLAs, and inconsistent subspecialty access.
Radiologists are heavily concentrated in urban and academic centers, leaving many rural and community hospitals with limited or no on-site coverage. About 60% of rural counties lack a single radiologist.
Recruitment is especially difficult in smaller markets, where fewer candidates are willing to relocate, and subspecialists are almost impossible to attract. This uneven distribution creates wide variation in turnaround times and subspecialty access.
Geographic maldistribution means that even when national headcount appears adequate on paper, many regions experience persistent gaps in expertise, reliability, and after-hours availability.
Clinical teams now expect 24/7 access to subspecialists, neuroradiology, breast imaging, MSK, cardiothoracic, pediatrics, and more, but the workforce to support those expectations is shrinking. About a third of the current workforce, predominantly subspecialists, will be retiring in the next 10 years, amplifying shortages in areas that are already difficult to staff.
As subspecialty availability declines, case complexity continues to rise. Stroke pathways, oncology follow-up, cardiac CTA, and pediatric imaging all require specialized readers, and gaps in coverage lead to delays, rerouted cases, or generalists handling exams intended for subspecialists. Rural hospitals and multisite systems experience this pressure most acutely, with limited ability to recruit or retain specialty-trained radiologists.
This mismatch between clinical expectations and available expertise makes consistent subspecialty access one of the most difficult challenges in today’s radiology environment.
Burnout is accelerating radiology’s workforce decline. Global survey data shows that 53% of radiologists cite burnout as their top concern, and many report that overnight work reduces diagnostic accuracy.
These pressures compound the shortage. When radiologists reduce hours, avoid nights, or leave practice entirely, remaining teams face heavier queues, higher stress, and greater variability in turnaround times. Burnout is directly reducing daily reading capacity across hospitals and health systems.
Historically, hospitals relied on recruitment, locums’ coverage, overtime incentives, and regional partnerships to fill radiology gaps. This no longer works at scale. The candidate pool is smaller, competition for subspecialists is intense, and locum tenens costs have risen sharply, yet it does not improve long-term service stability. Many groups report fewer applicants for open roles despite aggressive compensation packages, and vacancies now remain open for months or years.
While these approaches have worked in the past, the traditional staffing strategies can no longer keep up. Hiring more radiologists is not a reliable or sustainable path to maintaining coverage, especially for multi-site systems, rural hospitals, and 24/7 service lines that feel shortages most acutely.
The radiology workforce crisis is being driven by forces the traditional delivery model was never built to withstand. Recruitment alone can’t close the gap, and coverage variability is now affecting turnaround times, access to experts, and overall system reliability.
These pressures have pushed many organizations to look beyond conventional staffing strategies. As President of Intelerad, Morris Panner noted in an ITN interview, “Teleradiology has become an essential part of the imaging ecosystem. It’s no longer just for after-hours—many hospitals rely on it for baseline coverage.” This signifies a growing recognition that traditional models can’t sustain current demand, especially for multi-site systems and regions with persistent shortages.
In part two, we’ll explore how teleradiology helps hospitals keep up with rising image volumes and what to look for in a teleradiology solution.
The shortage is driven by a long-term supply gap, increased attrition, and many experienced clinicians are nearing retirement. Together, these forces create a structural deficit that training programs cannot replace fast enough.
Yes. CT, MRI, and ED imaging volumes continue to rise every year due to aging populations, chronic disease, and increased use of imaging in acute-care pathways like stroke and trauma. Case complexity is also increasing. Even under optimistic workforce projections, imaging demand is expected to exceed radiologist supply for decades.
Subspecialty demand far exceeds fellowship output. For example, between 2014 and 2023 there were 2,748 neuroradiology job postings but only 1,933 fellows entering the field. Similar gaps exist in breast imaging and pediatric radiology. These shortages make it difficult for hospitals, especially rural and multi-site systems, to maintain consistent 24/7 access to high-complexity expertise.
The candidate pool is shrinking, subspecialists are in short supply, and locum tenens costs have risen sharply. Many organizations report fewer applicants for open roles despite higher compensation, and positions now remain open for months or years. Recruitment alone cannot close the structural shortage, especially as imaging volumes continue to increase.
Rural regions have far fewer radiologists per capita, and many counties lack any on-site radiology presence at all. A Kansas rural-health review found that nearly 60% of rural counties don’t have a local radiologist, and RSNA reports that non-metropolitan patients often live far from advanced imaging services; only 22% live within 30 minutes of a lung screening center. This uneven geographic distribution creates persistent coverage gaps, delayed reads, and limited subspecialty access outside major metropolitan areas.
Not long ago, mammography looked very different.
Today’s patients expect healthcare to be digital, connected, and accessible.
Patient engagement has become a major competitive differentiator and has been driven by an increase in demand for transparency in medical care.
