Literature DB >> 35013824

Radiologist Productivity Analytics: Factors Impacting Abdominal Pelvic CT Exam Reporting Times.

Amar Udare1, Minu Agarwal1, Kiret Dhindsa2, Amer Alaref3, Michael Patlas1, Abdullah Alabousi4, Yoan K Kagoma1, Christian B van der Pol5,6.   

Abstract

The purpose is to determine factors impacting radiologist abdominal pelvic CT exam reporting time. This study was Research Ethics Board approved. Between January 2019 and March 2020, consecutive abdominal pelvic CT exams were documented as structured or unstructured based on application of templates with separate sections for different organs or organ systems. Radiologist reporting location, patient class (inpatient, Emergency Department (ED) patient, outpatient), radiologist fellowship-training, report word count, and radiologist years of experience were documented. Median reporting times were compared using the Wilcoxon Rank-sum test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and regression analysis. Spearman's rank correlation was used to determine correlation between word count and radiologist experience with reporting time. P < 0.05 is defined statistical significance. A total of 3602 abdominal pelvic CT exam reports completed by 33 radiologists were reviewed, including 1150 outpatient and 2452 inpatient and Emergency Department (ED) cases. 1398 of all reports were structured. Median reporting time for structured and unstructured reports did not differ (P = 0.870). Reports dictated in-house were completed faster than reports dictated remotely (P < 0.001), and reports for inpatients/ED patients were completed faster than for outpatients (P < 0.001). Reporting time differences existed between radiologists (P < 0.001) that were not explained by fellowship training (P = 0.762). Median reporting time had a weak correlation with word count (ρ = 0.355) and almost no correlation with radiologist years of experience (ρ = 0.167), P < 0.001. Abdominal pelvic CT reporting is most efficient when dictations are completed in-house and for high-priority cases; the use of structured templates, radiologist fellowship training, and years of experience have no impact on reporting times.
© 2021. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to Society for Imaging Informatics in Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Efficiency, Organizational; Multidetector computed tomography; Quality improvement; Workflow

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35013824      PMCID: PMC8921423          DOI: 10.1007/s10278-021-00548-w

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


  26 in total

1.  How Competitive Is the Canadian Diagnostic Radiology Residency Match? Application and Matching Trends From 1991-2014.

Authors:  Stephanie A Kenny; Kaisra Esmail; Rebecca M Hibbert; Matthew D F McInnes
Journal:  Can Assoc Radiol J       Date:  2016-01-30       Impact factor: 2.248

2.  Measuring and managing radiologist workload: measuring radiologist reporting times using data from a Radiology Information System.

Authors:  Ian A Cowan; Sharyn L S MacDonald; Richard A Floyd
Journal:  J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2013-07-12       Impact factor: 1.735

3.  Cohort study of structured reporting compared with conventional dictation.

Authors:  Annette J Johnson; Michael Y M Chen; J Shannon Swan; Kimberly E Applegate; Benjamin Littenberg
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-08-25       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Do MRI Structured Reports for Multiple Sclerosis Contain Adequate Information for Clinical Decision Making?

Authors:  Francesco Alessandrino; Anna Pichiecchio; Giulia Mallucci; Emanuele Ghione; Alfredo Romani; Roberto Bergamaschi; Stefano Bastianello
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2017-09-27       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Journal Club: Structured radiology reports are more complete and more effective than unstructured reports.

Authors:  Peter A Marcovici; George A Taylor
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Creation and implementation of department-wide structured reports: an analysis of the impact on error rate in radiology reports.

Authors:  C Matthew Hawkins; Seth Hall; Bin Zhang; Alexander J Towbin
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 4.056

7.  Quality Improvement of Breast MRI Reports With Standardized Templates for Structured Reporting.

Authors:  Dorothy A Sippo; Robyn L Birdwell; Katherine P Andriole; Sughra Raza
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2016-09-24       Impact factor: 5.532

8.  Structured reporting of MRI of the shoulder - improvement of report quality?

Authors:  Sebastian Gassenmaier; Marco Armbruster; Florian Haasters; Tobias Helfen; Thomas Henzler; Sedat Alibek; Dominik Pförringer; Wieland H Sommer; Nora N Sommer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-03-13       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Recall of structured radiology reports is significantly superior to that of unstructured reports.

Authors:  Bryan W Buckley; Leslie Daly; Grainne N Allen; Carole A Ridge
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-01-05       Impact factor: 3.039

10.  Burnout of Radiologists: Frequency, Risk Factors, and Remedies: A Report of the ACR Commission on Human Resources.

Authors:  Jay A Harolds; Jay R Parikh; Edward I Bluth; Sharon C Dutton; Michael P Recht
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2016-01-04       Impact factor: 5.532

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.