BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The complex information obtained by CT, MR, and ultrasound examinations is often difficult to convey with a written report. Today's multimedia computer technology provides a medium within which the audio and the visual components of a radiologic consultation can be made available simultaneously, with the projected capability of remote access from any personal computer. A system was developed to run on low-end computer systems with image quality adequate for reporting purposes and prudent memory management (each report occupies < 4 MB). With this system-"Robo-Rad"-the image and radiologist are recorded simultaneously while he or she describes and points out (with a mouse) areas of interest. This dynamic report, along with patient data, can be retrieved and viewed by the consulting physician at his/her convenience using a low-end PC or Macintosh computer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To assess the clinical utility of Robo-Rad, survey responses were solicited from clinical physicians at the Penn State University Hospital (41.5% faculty/fellows, 31.7% residents, 11.8% medical students, 2% clinical nursing; n = 101) during a hands-on demonstration using studies of 35 consecutive inpatients whose CT scans had been dictated into the system. RESULTS: In an average week, the surveyed professionals ordered 3.2 +/- 3.0 CT studies, reviewed 3.8 +/- 3.0 CTs, spent 1.5 +/- 2.0 hours locating Ct studies, and discussed 2.3 +/- 1.9 CT cases with a radiologist. The average time spent discussing a single CT case with a radiologist was reported as 9.4 +/- 5.9 minutes. On a five-point rating scale (1 = not at all to 5 = very much so), respondents indicated that the Robo-Rad report was helpful (4.3 +/- 0.7) and provided clinically important information that would be difficult to convey with current dictation systems (4.2 +/- 0.8). Desire to discuss the case with a radiologist in addition to viewing the Robo-Rad report scored 3.2 +/- 1.0. If such a system were readily available, 91.8% of the respondents indicated that they would use it in addition to the currently available written report and audio dictation system, and 96.6% would use it instead of the current system. Local area network and modems were the modalities of highest interest for remote access (69.3% and 44.6%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Judging by these data, the Robo-Rad system would be of benefit to clinicians. It provides a user-friendly, low-cost multimedia radiology report utilizing readily available technology to improve radiologist-clinician communication.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The complex information obtained by CT, MR, and ultrasound examinations is often difficult to convey with a written report. Today's multimedia computer technology provides a medium within which the audio and the visual components of a radiologic consultation can be made available simultaneously, with the projected capability of remote access from any personal computer. A system was developed to run on low-end computer systems with image quality adequate for reporting purposes and prudent memory management (each report occupies < 4 MB). With this system-"Robo-Rad"-the image and radiologist are recorded simultaneously while he or she describes and points out (with a mouse) areas of interest. This dynamic report, along with patient data, can be retrieved and viewed by the consulting physician at his/her convenience using a low-end PC or Macintosh computer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To assess the clinical utility of Robo-Rad, survey responses were solicited from clinical physicians at the Penn State University Hospital (41.5% faculty/fellows, 31.7% residents, 11.8% medical students, 2% clinical nursing; n = 101) during a hands-on demonstration using studies of 35 consecutive inpatients whose CT scans had been dictated into the system. RESULTS: In an average week, the surveyed professionals ordered 3.2 +/- 3.0 CT studies, reviewed 3.8 +/- 3.0 CTs, spent 1.5 +/- 2.0 hours locating Ct studies, and discussed 2.3 +/- 1.9 CT cases with a radiologist. The average time spent discussing a single CT case with a radiologist was reported as 9.4 +/- 5.9 minutes. On a five-point rating scale (1 = not at all to 5 = very much so), respondents indicated that the Robo-Rad report was helpful (4.3 +/- 0.7) and provided clinically important information that would be difficult to convey with current dictation systems (4.2 +/- 0.8). Desire to discuss the case with a radiologist in addition to viewing the Robo-Rad report scored 3.2 +/- 1.0. If such a system were readily available, 91.8% of the respondents indicated that they would use it in addition to the currently available written report and audio dictation system, and 96.6% would use it instead of the current system. Local area network and modems were the modalities of highest interest for remote access (69.3% and 44.6%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Judging by these data, the Robo-Rad system would be of benefit to clinicians. It provides a user-friendly, low-cost multimedia radiology report utilizing readily available technology to improve radiologist-clinician communication.
Authors: Veena R Iyer; Peter F Hahn; Lawrence S Blaszkowsky; Sarah P Thayer; Elkan F Halpern; Mukesh G Harisinghani Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Seth J Berkowitz; David Kwan; Toby C Cornish; Elliot L Silver; Karen S Thullner; Alex Aisen; Marilyn M Bui; Shawn D Clark; David A Clunie; Monief Eid; Douglas J Hartman; Kinson Ho; Andrei Leontiev; Damien M Luviano; Peter E O'Toole; Anil V Parwani; Nielsen S Pereira; Veronica Rotemberg; David J Vining; Cree M Gaskin; Christopher J Roth; Les R Folio Journal: J Digit Imaging Date: 2022-08-12 Impact factor: 4.903
Authors: Christopher J Roth; David A Clunie; David J Vining; Seth J Berkowitz; Alejandro Berlin; Jean-Pierre Bissonnette; Shawn D Clark; Toby C Cornish; Monief Eid; Cree M Gaskin; Alexander K Goel; Genevieve C Jacobs; David Kwan; Damien M Luviano; Morgan P McBee; Kelly Miller; Abdul Moiz Hafiz; Ceferino Obcemea; Anil V Parwani; Veronica Rotemberg; Elliot L Silver; Erik S Storm; James E Tcheng; Karen S Thullner; Les R Folio Journal: J Digit Imaging Date: 2021-06-15 Impact factor: 4.056