Literature DB >> 17411639

Improving the quality of radiology reporting: a physician survey to define the target.

Annette J Johnson1, Jun Ying, J Shannon Swan, Linda S Williams, Kimberly E Applegate, Benjamin Littenberg.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Our long-term goal is to improve the quality of reports in radiology imaging interpretation. The rationale for this project focused on identifying the characteristics of a high-quality report from the perspective of referring physicians and radiologists.
METHODS: We undertook a survey of physician faculty at a large Midwestern academic medical center (including university, children's, veteran's, county and private practice hospitals) regarding radiology report quality concepts.
RESULTS: Using a 5-point Likert scale, >95% of respondents indicated the highest importance rating (score=5) for radiology report characteristic "Accurate," with mean score of 4.94. Seventy-eight to 83% of respondents considered "Clear," "Complete" and "Timely" to have the highest importance rating, with means of these scores between 4.73 and 4.79. Somewhat less desirable characteristics included "Well-organized" and "Mentions pertinent negatives"-though radiologists tended to think the latter was less important than did all other categories of physician respondents. The single greatest problem area in reporting is lack of timeliness. Using a 10-point Likert scale, respondents gave a median score of seven for overall satisfaction with current reporting.
CONCLUSIONS: For high-quality radiology reporting, accuracy is most important. Clarity, completeness and timeliness are also very important. Radiologists tend to consider mentioning pertinent negatives as less important than do referring physicians; otherwise, respondents from different specialties largely agreed on which characteristics are most important for high-quality reports. There is room for improvement in physician satisfaction with radiology reporting.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 17411639     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2004.02.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol        ISSN: 1546-1440            Impact factor:   5.532


  12 in total

1.  Conceptual approach for the design of radiology reporting interfaces: the talking template.

Authors:  Chris L Sistrom
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  General practitioners' views on radiology reports of plain radiography for back pain.

Authors:  Ansgar Espeland; Anders Baerheim
Journal:  Scand J Prim Health Care       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.581

3.  Value-Based Assessment of Radiology Reporting Using Radiologist-Referring Physician Two-Way Feedback System-a Design Thinking-Based Approach.

Authors:  Faiq Shaikh; Kenneth Hendrata; Brian Kolowitz; Omer Awan; Rasu Shrestha; Christopher Deible
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 4.056

4.  Added value of selected images embedded into radiology reports to referring clinicians.

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

5.  A novel method to assess incompleteness of mammography reports.

Authors:  Francisco J Gimenez; Yirong Wu; Elizabeth S Burnside; Daniel L Rubin
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2014-11-14

6.  Development, implementation, and evaluation of a structured reporting web tool for abdominal aortic aneurysms.

Authors:  Sulafa Karim; Christian Fegeler; Dittmar Boeckler; Lawrence H Schwartz; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Hendrik von Tengg-Kobligk
Journal:  JMIR Res Protoc       Date:  2013-08-16

7.  Adherence of Academic Radiologists in a Non-English Speaking Imaging Center to the BI-RADS Standards of Reporting Breast MRI.

Authors:  Sepideh Sefidbakht; Reza Jalli; Ensieh Izadpanah
Journal:  J Clin Imaging Sci       Date:  2015-12-31

8.  Neuroimaging referral for dementia diagnosis: The specialist's perspective in Ireland.

Authors:  Aurelia S Ciblis; Marie-Louise Butler; Arun L W Bokde; Paul G Mullins; Desmond O'Neill; Jonathan P McNulty
Journal:  Alzheimers Dement (Amst)       Date:  2015-03-29

9.  Strengthening monitoring and evaluation (M&E) and building sustainable health information systems in resource limited countries: lessons learned from an M&E task-shifting initiative in Botswana.

Authors:  Mulamuli Mpofu; Bazghina-Werq Semo; Jessica Grignon; Refeletswe Lebelonyane; Steven Ludick; Ellah Matshediso; Baraedi Sento; Jenny H Ledikwe
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2014-10-03       Impact factor: 3.295

10.  The Effects of Real-Time Interactive Multimedia Teleradiology System.

Authors:  Lilac Al-Safadi
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2016-05-17       Impact factor: 3.411

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.