Literature DB >> 28154988

Computer-Aided Reporting of Chest Radiographs: Efficient and Effective Screening in the Value-Based Imaging Era.

Michael Morris1,2,3,4, Babak Saboury5,6,7, Niketh Bandla5, Christopher Toland5,8,7, Christopher Meenan5,8,7, Eliot Siegel5,6,7, Jean Jeudy5,6,7.   

Abstract

In the post-PACS era, mammography is unique in adopting specialized ergonomic interfaces to improve efficiency in a high volume setting. Chest radiography is also a high volume area of radiology. The authors hypothesize that applying a novel interface for chest radiography interpretation and reporting could create high productivity while maintaining quality. A custom version of the ClearCanvas open source software, EzRad, was created with a workflow re-designed specifically for tuberculosis screening chest radiographs, which utilized standardized computer generated reports. The preliminary reports from 881,792 studies evaluated by radiology residents over a nine-year period were analyzed for productivity as RVU/FTE and compared to the finalized reports from a subspecialty attending chest radiologist for accuracy. Radiology residents were able to produce 7480 RVU/FTE per year in screening chest radiography productivity when using a custom interface at a large academic medical center with a miss rate of 0.1%. Sensitivity was 77% and specificity was 99.9%. An ergonomic user interface allowed high productivity in interpretation of chest radiography for tuberculosis screening while maintaining quality.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Big data; Computer aided reporting; Productivity; Screening chest radiograph; Tuberculosis; Value based care

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28154988      PMCID: PMC5603434          DOI: 10.1007/s10278-017-9952-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Digit Imaging        ISSN: 0897-1889            Impact factor:   4.056


  14 in total

1.  Hospital takes plunge into full-fledged PACS.

Authors:  E L Siegel
Journal:  Diagn Imaging (San Franc)       Date:  1993-02

Review 2.  The Relative Value Unit: History, Current Use, and Controversies.

Authors:  Amanjit Baadh; Yuri Peterkin; Melanie Wegener; Jonathan Flug; Douglas Katz; Jason C Hoffmann
Journal:  Curr Probl Diagn Radiol       Date:  2015-10-09

3.  The academic radiologist's clinical productivity: an update.

Authors:  Ying Lu; Ronald L Arenson
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 3.173

4.  Workload of radiologists in United States in 2006-2007 and trends since 1991-1992.

Authors:  Mythreyi Bhargavan; Adam H Kaye; Howard P Forman; Jonathan H Sunshine
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-06-09       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Toward best practices in radiology reporting.

Authors:  Charles E Kahn; Curtis P Langlotz; Elizabeth S Burnside; John A Carrino; David S Channin; David M Hovsepian; Daniel L Rubin
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Medicare program; revisions to payment policies under the Physician Fee Schedule, Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule, access to identifiable data for the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation Models & other revisions to Part B for CY 2015. Final rule with comment period.

Authors: 
Journal:  Fed Regist       Date:  2014-11-13

7.  Reporting initiative of the Radiological Society of North America: progress and new directions.

Authors:  Tara A Morgan; Marta E Helibrun; Charles E Kahn
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Measuring radiology's value in time saved.

Authors:  Christoph I Lee; Dieter R Enzmann
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 5.532

9.  Likelihood ratios for modern screening mammography. Risk of breast cancer based on age and mammographic interpretation.

Authors:  K Kerlikowske; D Grady; J Barclay; E A Sickles; V Ernster
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1996-07-03       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Effects of age, breast density, ethnicity, and estrogen replacement therapy on screening mammographic sensitivity and cancer stage at diagnosis: review of 183,134 screening mammograms in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Authors:  R D Rosenberg; W C Hunt; M R Williamson; F D Gilliland; P W Wiest; C A Kelsey; C R Key; M N Linver
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 11.105

View more
  1 in total

1.  Value of an online PI-RADS v2.1 score calculator for assessment of prostate MRI.

Authors:  Borna K Barth; Katharina Martini; Stephan M Skawran; Florian A Schmid; Niels J Rupp; Laura Zuber; Olivio F Donati
Journal:  Eur J Radiol Open       Date:  2021-02-27
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.