Radiology reporting: a general practitioner's perspective.

Unlike hospital-based clinicians, general practitioners (GPs) lack direct contact with radiologists, and the radiology report is usually the sole method of communication from the radiologist to the GP. It is important to gain feedback regarding what GPs perceive as a good-quality radiology report, especially in the current climate of competition for provision of radiology services. The aims of this study are to determine the level of GP satisfaction with radiology reports, their perception of optimum report content and their preferences regarding the level of detail and report format. A questionnaire was sent to 100 GPs referring to our Trust for radiology services. GPs were generally satisfied with the content and clarity of reports that they receive, and gave suggestions on how reports could be improved. The majority of GPs were unfamiliar with the normal size ranges of frequently measured anatomical structures. Radiologists' recommendations for further treatment, referral and non-radiological investigation were viewed as valuable report components. When asked to rank preferences for ultrasound reports for the same patient with differing formats and levels of detail, GPs favoured detailed reports in a tabulated format. In conclusion, the majority of GPs like detailed reports and value the radiologist's opinion outside the remit of imaging when suggesting further patient management. Reporting the size of a structure without explanation of its significance can potentially cause confusion. It is important to know if GPs are satisfied with the radiology reports they receive so that we can uphold high communication standards and ultimately improve patient care.