Literature DB >> 24485759

Actionable findings and the role of IT support: report of the ACR Actionable Reporting Work Group.

Paul A Larson1, Lincoln L Berland2, Brent Griffith3, Charles E Kahn4, Lawrence A Liebscher5.   

Abstract

The ACR formed the Actionable Reporting Work Group to address the potential role of IT in the communication of imaging findings, especially in cases that require nonroutine communication because of the urgency of the findings or their unexpected nature. These findings that require special communication with referring clinicians are classified as "actionable findings." The work group defines 3 categories of actionable findings that require, respectively, communication and clinical decision within minutes (category 1), hours (category 2), or days (category 3). Although the work group does not believe that there can be definitive lists of such findings, it developed lists in each category that would apply in most general hospital settings. For each category, the work group discusses ways in which IT can assist interpreting radiologists in successfully communicating to the relevant clinicians to ensure optimal patient care. IT systems can also help document the communication and facilitate auditing of the documentation. The work group recommends that vendors develop platforms that can be customized on the basis of local preferences and needs. Whatever system is used, it should be highly reliable and fit seamlessly into radiologists' workflow.
Copyright © 2014 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Actionable findings; Joint Commission; actionable reporting; communication; critical findings; critical results; decision support; incidental findings; information technology; unexpected findings

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24485759     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2013.12.016

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


  16 in total

1.  Survey of radiologists and emergency department providers after implementation of a global radiology report categorization system.

Authors:  Eric L Tung; Elizabeth H Dibble; Gaurav Jindal; Jonathan S Movson; David W Swenson
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2020-07-28

2.  Contextual Structured Reporting in Radiology: Implementation and Long-Term Evaluation in Improving the Communication of Critical Findings.

Authors:  Allard W Olthof; Anne L M Leusveld; Jan Cees de Groot; Petra M C Callenbach; Peter M A van Ooijen
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2020-07-28       Impact factor: 4.460

3.  [Incidental findings : Evaluation, management recommendations and legal considerations].

Authors:  P Mildenberger
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 0.635

4.  The RADCAT-3 system for closing the loop on important non-urgent radiology findings: a multidisciplinary system-wide approach.

Authors:  Elizabeth H Dibble; David W Swenson; Cynthia Cobb; Timothy J Paul; Andrew E Karn; David C Portelli; Jonathan S Movson
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2016-10-14

5.  Pilot study of a new comprehensive radiology report categorization (RADCAT) system in the emergency department.

Authors:  David W Swenson; Grayson L Baird; David C Portelli; Martha B Mainiero; Jonathan S Movson
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2017-11-08

6.  Framework for Extracting Critical Findings in Radiology Reports.

Authors:  Thusitha Mabotuwana; Christopher S Hall; Nathan Cross
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 4.056

7.  Code Abdomen: An Assessment Coding Scheme for Abdominal Imaging Findings Possibly Representing Cancer.

Authors:  Hanna M Zafar; Seetharam C Chadalavada; Charles E Kahn; Tessa S Cook; Caroline E Sloan; Darco Lalevic; Curtis P Langlotz; Mitchell D Schnall
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2015-06-27       Impact factor: 5.532

8.  Determining Follow-Up Imaging Study Using Radiology Reports.

Authors:  Sandeep Dalal; Vadiraj Hombal; Wei-Hung Weng; Gabe Mankovich; Thusitha Mabotuwana; Christopher S Hall; Joseph Fuller; Bruce E Lehnert; Martin L Gunn
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 4.056

9.  Viewing Imaging Studies: How Patient Location and Imaging Site Affect Referring Physicians.

Authors:  Fatemeh Homayounieh; Ramandeep Singh; Tianqi Chen; Ellen J Sugarman; Thomas J Schultz; Subba R Digumarthy; Keith J Dreyer; Mannudeep K Kalra
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 4.056

10.  Assessment of follow-up completeness and notification preferences for imaging findings of possible cancer: what happens after radiologists submit their reports?

Authors:  Caroline E Sloan; Seetharam C Chadalavada; Tessa S Cook; Curtis P Langlotz; Mitchell D Schnall; Hanna M Zafar
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2014-08-30       Impact factor: 3.173

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.