Literature DB >> 21719719

Quality initiatives: measuring and managing the procedural competency of radiologists.

Mishal Mendiratta-Lala1, Ronald L Eisenberg, Joseph R Steele, Phillip M Boiselle, Jonathan B Kruskal.   

Abstract

Many regulatory and oversight groups require that the professional performance of radiologists be evaluated on an ongoing basis. Although the diagnostic accuracy of radiologists is routinely measured at most institutions by means of peer review processes, systems for evaluating procedural competency are not widely available. Consequently, technical skills are seldom, if ever, evaluated or managed. The key elements of a system for evaluating procedural competency include the following: (a) clear definition of all elements of a transparent evaluation process; (b) definition of standards for training and credentialing and options for maintenance of competency certification in interventional procedures; (c) collection and analysis of process and outcomes metrics; (d) multisource feedback on procedural, patient care, and safety skills; and (e) an effective, anonymous process for managing radiologists in whom deficiencies are identified. Although no ideal system for evaluating procedural competency currently exists, inclusion of these elements goes a long way toward facilitating the introduction of a simple process for providing appropriate feedback to procedural radiologists, acknowledging excellence, and identifying and managing deficiencies if they occur.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21719719     DOI: 10.1148/rg.315105242

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiographics        ISSN: 0271-5333            Impact factor:   5.333


  7 in total

1.  Developing an automated database for monitoring ultrasound- and computed tomography-guided procedure complications and diagnostic yield.

Authors:  Jason N Itri; Lisa P Jones; Woojin Kim; William W Boonn; Ana S Kolansky; Susan Hilton; Hanna M Zafar
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 4.056

Review 2.  Academic radiology in the new health care delivery environment.

Authors:  Aliya Qayyum; John-Paul J Yu; Akash P Kansagra; Nathaniel von Fischer; Daniel Costa; Matthew Heller; Stamatis Kantartzis; R Scooter Plowman; Jason Itri
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.173

Review 3.  Risk management in radiology departments.

Authors:  Horea Craciun; Kshitij Mankad; Jeremy Lynch
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2015-06-28

4.  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

5.  Familiarity with current practices of granting and maintaining privileges in pediatric interventional radiology--a worldwide survey of the members of the Society for Pediatric Interventional Radiology (SPIR).

Authors:  Roger K Harned
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2012-08-02

Review 6.  Computer-assisted diagnosis in renal nuclear medicine: rationale, methodology, and interpretative criteria for diuretic renography.

Authors:  Andrew T Taylor; Ernest V Garcia
Journal:  Semin Nucl Med       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 4.446

7.  Malpractice in radiology: what should you worry about?

Authors:  Alessandro Cannavale; Mariangela Santoni; Paola Mancarella; Roberto Passariello; Paolo Arbarello
Journal:  Radiol Res Pract       Date:  2013-04-03
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.