Literature DB >> 18327594

Radiology report turnaround: expectations and solutions.

G W L Boland1, A S Guimaraes, P R Mueller.   

Abstract

The ultimate work product of a radiology department is a finalized radiology report. Radiology stakeholders are now demanding faster report turnaround times (RTAT) and anything that delays delivery of the finalized report will undermine the value of a radiology department. Traditional reporting methods are inherently inefficient and the desire to deliver fast RTAT will always be challenged. It is only through the adoption of an integrated radiology information system (RIS)/picture archiving and communication system (PACS) and voice recognition (VR) system that RTAT can consistently meet stakeholder expectations. VR systems also offer the opportunity to create standardized, higher quality reports.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18327594     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-008-0905-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   7.034


  22 in total

1.  Utilization of radiology services in the United States: levels and trends in modalities, regions, and populations.

Authors:  Mythreyi Bhargavan; Jonathan H Sunshine
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-01-28       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Workload of radiologists in the United States in 2002-2003 and trends since 1991-1992.

Authors:  Mythreyi Bhargavan; Jonathan H Sunshine
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-07-12       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Reinventing radiology in the digital age: part I. The all-digital department.

Authors:  James H Thrall
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 4.  Basics of imaging informatics: part 2.

Authors:  Barton F Branstetter
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 5.  Today's labor market: recruiting radiologists in a time of shortages.

Authors:  Ann Lamb
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 5.532

6.  Everyone is working harder.

Authors:  Bruce J Hillman
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 5.532

Review 7.  A framework for improving radiology reporting.

Authors:  Chris L Sistrom; Curtis P Langlotz
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 5.532

8.  Diagnostic radiology reporting and communication: the ACR guideline.

Authors:  David C Kushner; Leonard L Lucey
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 5.532

9.  Medical impact of unedited preliminary radiology reports.

Authors:  B L Holman; P Aliabadi; S G Silverman; B N Weissman; L E Rudolph; E F Fener
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Improving report turnaround time: an integrated method using data from a radiology information system.

Authors:  J P Crabbe; C L Frank; W W Nye
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 3.959

View more
  13 in total

1.  Influence of radiology report format on reading time and comprehension.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Krupinski; E Tyler Hall; Stacy Jaw; Bruce Reiner; Eliot Siegel
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  Learning curve of speech recognition.

Authors:  Tomi A Kauppinen; Johanna Kaipio; Mika P Koivikko
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 4.056

3.  Is there an association between radiologist turnaround time of emergency department abdominal CT studies and radiologic report quality?

Authors:  Andrew B Rosenkrantz; John A Bonavita; Mark P Foran; Brent W Matza; John M McMenamy
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2013-10-03

4.  Evaluating the implementation of picture archiving and communication systems in Newfoundland and Labrador--a cost benefit analysis.

Authors:  Don MacDonald; Doreen Neville
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2009-08-26       Impact factor: 4.056

5.  Quality metrics currently used in academic radiology departments: results of the QUALMET survey.

Authors:  Eric A Walker; Jonelle M Petscavage-Thomas; Joseph S Fotos; Michael A Bruno
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-01-24       Impact factor: 3.039

6.  Assessing the Training Costs and Work of Diagnostic Radiology Residents Using Key Performance Indicators - An Observational Study.

Authors:  Marta E Heilbrun; Brad Poss; Luca Boi; Yoshimi Anzai; Nan Hu; Robert S Kaplan
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2019-08-31       Impact factor: 3.173

7.  Recall of structured radiology reports is significantly superior to that of unstructured reports.

Authors:  Bryan W Buckley; Leslie Daly; Grainne N Allen; Carole A Ridge
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-01-05       Impact factor: 3.039

8.  The Role of the Integrated Digital Radiology System in Assessing the Impact of Patient Load on Emergency Computed Tomography (CT) Efficiency.

Authors:  Suzanne O'Hagan; Carl J Lombard; Richard D Pitcher
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 4.056

9.  Good practice for radiological reporting. Guidelines from the European Society of Radiology (ESR).

Authors: 
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2011-02-06

10.  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
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.