PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to evaluate opinions and perceptions of radiologists and referring practitioners regarding reports of portable chest radiography (pCXR) obtained in the intensive care unit (ICU). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 1265 referring practitioners and 76 radiologists were invited to participate in 2 internet-based surveys, containing 15 and 17 multiple choice questions, respectively, similarly presented to both groups, utilizing a Likert scale or multiple choices. Results were compared using the Fisher exact test or χ test. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-two referring practitioners and 63 radiologists answered the surveys, resulting in response rates of 15% and 83%. The majority of radiologists and referring practitioners are satisfied with the quality of the reports; however, radiologists and referring practitioners disagree about the reports' clinical value and impact, the referring practitioners having a more positive view. Both groups overwhelmingly agree that pertinent clinical information is crucial for optimal image interpretation. The 2 groups differ in their preferences regarding report style and information content, with radiologists strongly supporting concise reports emphasizing temporal changes and major findings, whereas referring practitioners prefer more complete, itemized structured reports describing support devices in detail. CONCLUSIONS: The results substantiate the perceived clinical value of radiologist reports for pCXR, from the perspective of referring practitioners. Nonetheless, there is disagreement regarding report structure and content. Several issues were raised, offering opportunities for improvement, which may increase referring practitioners' satisfaction and positively impact patient outcomes. Any strategy to implement standardized structured reports for pCXR will have to satisfy referring practitioners' needs while optimizing radiologists' efficiency, will have to be widely accepted, and will have to fulfill the overarching goal of maximizing the value of pCXR reports.
PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to evaluate opinions and perceptions of radiologists and referring practitioners regarding reports of portable chest radiography (pCXR) obtained in the intensive care unit (ICU). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 1265 referring practitioners and 76 radiologists were invited to participate in 2 internet-based surveys, containing 15 and 17 multiple choice questions, respectively, similarly presented to both groups, utilizing a Likert scale or multiple choices. Results were compared using the Fisher exact test or χ test. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-two referring practitioners and 63 radiologists answered the surveys, resulting in response rates of 15% and 83%. The majority of radiologists and referring practitioners are satisfied with the quality of the reports; however, radiologists and referring practitioners disagree about the reports' clinical value and impact, the referring practitioners having a more positive view. Both groups overwhelmingly agree that pertinent clinical information is crucial for optimal image interpretation. The 2 groups differ in their preferences regarding report style and information content, with radiologists strongly supporting concise reports emphasizing temporal changes and major findings, whereas referring practitioners prefer more complete, itemized structured reports describing support devices in detail. CONCLUSIONS: The results substantiate the perceived clinical value of radiologist reports for pCXR, from the perspective of referring practitioners. Nonetheless, there is disagreement regarding report structure and content. Several issues were raised, offering opportunities for improvement, which may increase referring practitioners' satisfaction and positively impact patient outcomes. Any strategy to implement standardized structured reports for pCXR will have to satisfy referring practitioners' needs while optimizing radiologists' efficiency, will have to be widely accepted, and will have to fulfill the overarching goal of maximizing the value of pCXR reports.
Authors: Adam Spandorfer; Cody Branch; Puneet Sharma; Pooyan Sahbaee; U Joseph Schoepf; James G Ravenel; John W Nance Journal: Eur Radiol Exp Date: 2019-09-23