Yitka Graham1,2, Catherine Hayes3, Pallavi Mehrotra4, Jonathan Spratt4, Kathryn Siddle4, Julie Cox4,3. 1. Department of Radiology, City Hospitals Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust, Kayll Road, Sunderland, Tyne and Wear, SR4 7TP, UK. yitka.graham@sunderland.ac.uk. 2. Faculty of Health Sciences and Wellbeing, University of Sunderland, Sciences Complex, Sunderland, Tyne and Wear, SR1 3SD, UK. yitka.graham@sunderland.ac.uk. 3. Faculty of Health Sciences and Wellbeing, University of Sunderland, Sciences Complex, Sunderland, Tyne and Wear, SR1 3SD, UK. 4. Department of Radiology, City Hospitals Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust, Kayll Road, Sunderland, Tyne and Wear, SR4 7TP, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Outsourcing of radiological reporting services has fundamentally altered communication between radiologists and clinicians in clinical decision making, which relies heavily on diagnostic imaging. The aim of this study was to understand clinicians' perspectives and experiences of interpretation of outsourced reports in clinical practice, if the author of imaging reports matters to clinicians, and actions taken to deal with perceived errors. METHODS: A printed survey was distributed to a purposive sample of 50 of the 250 senior medical and surgical staff of a large National Health Service hospital in the UK who regularly engaged with the Radiology Department between May and October 2017, representing 20% of this hospital workforce. The survey consisted of ten questions examining clinicians' opinions on radiology reporting, with comment options to encourage respondents to give further detail. Participants were requested to return the survey to the study investigators. RESULTS: The survey elicited a 100% response rate (n = 50). A constant comparative framework was used to guide analysis, revealing themes relevant to the ongoing inter-professional relationship between clinicians and radiologists. The disparity between in-house and externally sourced radiology reports and underlying issues of trust surrounding outsourced reports were the most significant themes identified. CONCLUSIONS: This study found outsourcing of radiology reporting needs multi-disciplinary team availability regarding the interpretation and discussions around capacity for effective communication. It raises important issues around often under-acknowledged additional workloads imposed on in-house radiologists. There are financial and pragmatic clinical aspects in pathways of radiology practice which require further research and examination. KEY POINTS: • Utilisation of outsourcing is increasing in practice in response to imaging demands. • Outsourcing increases departmental primary reporting capacity but may increase the workload of the local radiologist. • The development of strategies for outsourcing examinations may lessen demands on the in-house workforce.
OBJECTIVES: Outsourcing of radiological reporting services has fundamentally altered communication between radiologists and clinicians in clinical decision making, which relies heavily on diagnostic imaging. The aim of this study was to understand clinicians' perspectives and experiences of interpretation of outsourced reports in clinical practice, if the author of imaging reports matters to clinicians, and actions taken to deal with perceived errors. METHODS: A printed survey was distributed to a purposive sample of 50 of the 250 senior medical and surgical staff of a large National Health Service hospital in the UK who regularly engaged with the Radiology Department between May and October 2017, representing 20% of this hospital workforce. The survey consisted of ten questions examining clinicians' opinions on radiology reporting, with comment options to encourage respondents to give further detail. Participants were requested to return the survey to the study investigators. RESULTS: The survey elicited a 100% response rate (n = 50). A constant comparative framework was used to guide analysis, revealing themes relevant to the ongoing inter-professional relationship between clinicians and radiologists. The disparity between in-house and externally sourced radiology reports and underlying issues of trust surrounding outsourced reports were the most significant themes identified. CONCLUSIONS: This study found outsourcing of radiology reporting needs multi-disciplinary team availability regarding the interpretation and discussions around capacity for effective communication. It raises important issues around often under-acknowledged additional workloads imposed on in-house radiologists. There are financial and pragmatic clinical aspects in pathways of radiology practice which require further research and examination. KEY POINTS: • Utilisation of outsourcing is increasing in practice in response to imaging demands. • Outsourcing increases departmental primary reporting capacity but may increase the workload of the local radiologist. • The development of strategies for outsourcing examinations may lessen demands on the in-house workforce.
Authors: Stephen M Blumberg; Prashant V Mahajan; Karen J OʼConnell; James M Chamberlain; Kathy N Shaw; Richard M Ruddy; Richard Lichenstein; Tomohiko Funai; Kathleen A Lillis Journal: Pediatr Emerg Care Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 1.454
Authors: Andreas Gutzeit; Regine Heiland; Sonja Sudarski; Johannes M Froehlich; Klaus Hergan; Matthias Meissnitzer; Sebastian Kos; Peter Bertke; Orpheus Kolokythas; Dow M Koh Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-06-25 Impact factor: 5.315