P Tim Maddux1, Mary Beth Farrell2, Joseph A Ewing1, Peter L Tilkemeier1. 1. Greenville Health System, 701 Grove Road Support Tower 5, Greenville, SC, 29605, USA. 2. Intersocietal Accreditation Commission, Ellicott City, MD, USA. farrell@intersocietal.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In 2011, Tilkemeier et al reported significant nuclear cardiology laboratory noncompliance with reporting standards. The aim of this study was to identify and examine noncompliant reporting elements with the Intersocietal Accreditation Commission Nuclear/PET (IAC) Reporting Standards and to compare compliance between 2008 and 2014. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of compliance with 18 reporting elements utilizing accreditation findings from all laboratories applying for accreditation in 2008 and 2014. RESULTS: 1816 labs applying for initial or subsequent accreditation were analyzed for compliance. The mean reporting noncompliance per lab decreased from 2008 to 2014 (2.48 ± 2.67 to 1.24 ± 1.79, P < .001). Noncompliance decreased across lab types, labs with Certification Board of Nuclear Cardiology physicians on staff, and by geographic region (P < .001). Overall severity of reporting issues decreased. Facilities with compliant reports increased from 35.0% in 2008 to 57.1% in 2014 (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Continuing medical education, accreditation, and other instructional activities aimed at improving nuclear cardiology reporting appear to have made a positive impact over time with the number and severity of noncompliance decreased. More labs are now compliant with the IAC Standards and, thus, reporting guidelines. However, the need for continued educational efforts remains.
BACKGROUND: In 2011, Tilkemeier et al reported significant nuclear cardiology laboratory noncompliance with reporting standards. The aim of this study was to identify and examine noncompliant reporting elements with the Intersocietal Accreditation Commission Nuclear/PET (IAC) Reporting Standards and to compare compliance between 2008 and 2014. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of compliance with 18 reporting elements utilizing accreditation findings from all laboratories applying for accreditation in 2008 and 2014. RESULTS: 1816 labs applying for initial or subsequent accreditation were analyzed for compliance. The mean reporting noncompliance per lab decreased from 2008 to 2014 (2.48 ± 2.67 to 1.24 ± 1.79, P < .001). Noncompliance decreased across lab types, labs with Certification Board of Nuclear Cardiology physicians on staff, and by geographic region (P < .001). Overall severity of reporting issues decreased. Facilities with compliant reports increased from 35.0% in 2008 to 57.1% in 2014 (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Continuing medical education, accreditation, and other instructional activities aimed at improving nuclear cardiology reporting appear to have made a positive impact over time with the number and severity of noncompliance decreased. More labs are now compliant with the IAC Standards and, thus, reporting guidelines. However, the need for continued educational efforts remains.
Authors: C Anagnostopoulos; M Harbinson; A Kelion; K Kundley; C Y Loong; A Notghi; E Reyes; W Tindale; S R Underwood Journal: Nucl Med Commun Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 1.690
Authors: B Hesse; T B Lindhardt; W Acampa; C Anagnostopoulos; J Ballinger; J J Bax; L Edenbrandt; A Flotats; G Germano; T Gmeiner Stopar; P Franken; A Kelion; A Kjaer; D Le Guludec; M Ljungberg; A F Maenhout; C Marcassa; J Marving; F McKiddie; W M Schaefer; L Stegger; R Underwood Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: R Edward Coleman; Bruce E Hillner; Anthony F Shields; Fenghai Duan; Denise A Merlino; Lucy G Hanna; Sharon Hartson Stine; Barry A Siegel Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2009-12-15 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Peter L Tilkemeier; Jamieson Bourque; Rami Doukky; Rupa Sanghani; Richard L Weinberg Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2017-09-15 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Moses Matovu; Elias Musiime; Patrick Olak; Muhammad Mulindwa; Eve Namisango; Kilian Songwe Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2022-02-10 Impact factor: 2.655