Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

Tytuł pozycji:

Multicenter survey clarifying phrases in emergency radiology reports.

Tytuł:
Multicenter survey clarifying phrases in emergency radiology reports.
Autorzy:
Ogawa M; Department of Radiology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 1000 Tenth Ave., New York, NY, 10019, USA. .
Lee CH; Department of Radiology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 1000 Tenth Ave., New York, NY, 10019, USA.
Friedman B; Department of Radiology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 1000 Tenth Ave., New York, NY, 10019, USA.
Źródło:
Emergency radiology [Emerg Radiol] 2022 Oct; Vol. 29 (5), pp. 855-862. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 Jun 14.
Typ publikacji:
Journal Article; Multicenter Study
Język:
English
Imprint Name(s):
Publication: New York, NY : Springer-Verlag New York Inc
Original Publication: Baltimore, MD. : Williams & Wilkins, c1994-
MeSH Terms:
Radiologists*
Radiology*
Humans ; Radiography ; Surveys and Questionnaires
References:
Reiner B et al (1999) Impact of filmless radiology on frequency of clinician consultations with radiologists. AJR Am J Roentgenol 173(5):1169–1172. (PMID: 10.2214/ajr.173.5.10541082)
Berlin L (2000) Pitfalls of the vague radiology report. AJR Am J Roentgenol 174(6):1511–1518. (PMID: 10.2214/ajr.174.6.1741511)
Dunnick NR, Langlotz CP (2008) The radiology report of the future: a summary of the 2007 Intersociety Conference. J Am Coll Radiol 5(5):626–629. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jacr.2007.12.015)
Panicek DM, Hricak H (2016) How Sure Are You, Doctor? A standardized lexicon to describe the radiologist’s level of certainty. AJR Am J Roentgenol 207(1):2–3. (PMID: 10.2214/AJR.15.15895)
Selvarajan SK, Levin DC, Parker L (2019) The increasing use of emergency department imaging in the united states: is it appropriate? AJR Am J Roentgenol 213(4):W180–W184. (PMID: 10.2214/AJR.19.21386)
Grant MD et al (2021) Are we speaking the same language? Communicating diagnostic probability in the radiology report. AJR Am J Roentgenol 216(3):806–811. (PMID: 10.2214/AJR.20.23328)
Blagev DP et al (2014) Follow-up of incidental pulmonary nodules and the radiology report. J Am Coll Radiol 11(4):378–383. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jacr.2013.08.003)
Khalil HI, Patterson SA, Panicek DM (2005) Hepatic lesions deemed too small to characterize at CT: prevalence and importance in women with breast cancer. Radiology 235(3):872–878. (PMID: 10.1148/radiol.2353041099)
Contributed Indexing:
Keywords: Communication; Emergency; Probabilistic phrases; Radiology reports
Entry Date(s):
Date Created: 20220614 Date Completed: 20220912 Latest Revision: 20220912
Update Code:
20240105
DOI:
10.1007/s10140-022-02057-x
PMID:
35701617
Czasopismo naukowe
Purpose: Interactions between radiologists and emergency physicians are often diminished as imaging volume increases and more radiologists read off site. We explore how several commonly used phrasings are perceived by radiologists and emergency physicians to decrease ambiguity in reporting.
Methods: An anonymous survey was distributed to attendings and residents at seven academic radiology and emergency departments across the USA via a digital platform as well as to an email group consisting of radiologists across the country with an interest in quality assurance. Physicians were asked to assign a percent score to probabilistic phrases such as, "suspicious of," or "concerned for." Additional questions including, "how often the report findings are reviewed," "what makes a good radiology report," and "when is it useful to use the phrase 'clinical correlation are recommended.'" Median scores and confidence intervals were compared using an independent Student's T-test.
Results: Generally, there was agreement between radiologists and emergency room physicians in how they interpret probabilistic phrases except for the phrases, "compatible with," and "subcentimeter liver lesions too small to characterize." Radiologists consider a useful report to answer the clinical question, be concise, and well organized. Emergency physicians consider a useful report to be concise, definitive or include a differential diagnosis, answer the clinical question, and recommend a next step. Radiologists and emergency physicians did not agree on the usefulness of the phrase, "clinical correlation recommended," in which radiologists found the phrase more helpful under particular circumstances.
Conclusion: The survey demonstrated a wide range of answers for probabilistic phrases for both radiologists and emergency physicians. While the medians and means of the two groups were often different by statistical significance, the actual percent difference was minor. These wide range of answers suggest that use of probabilistic phrases may sometimes lead to misinterpretation between radiologist and emergency room physician and should be avoided or defined if possible.
(© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to American Society of Emergency Radiology (ASER).)

Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies