Document Detail


Quality of the written radiology report: a review of the literature.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  20678733     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
PURPOSE: A literature review was carried out, guided by the question, What are the important elements of a high-quality radiology written report?
METHODS: Two papers known to the authors were used as a basis for 5 PubMed search strategies. Exclusion criteria were applied to retrieved citations. Reference lists of retrieved citations were scanned for additional relevant papers and exclusion criteria applied to these. Web sites of professional radiology organizations were scanned for guidelines relating to the written radiology report. Retrieved guidelines were appraised using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation instrument. Methodologies of retrieved papers were not suitable for conventional appraisal, and an evidence table was constructed.
RESULTS: The search strategy identified 25 published papers and 4 guidelines. Published study methodologies included 1 randomized controlled trial; 1 before-and-after study of interventions; 10 observational studies, audits, or analyses; 12 surveys; and 1 narrative review of the literature.
CONCLUSIONS: Existing guidelines have a number of weaknesses with regard to scope and purpose, methods of development, stakeholder consultation, and editorial independence and applicability. There is a major gap in published studies relating to testing of interventions to improve report quality using conventional randomized controlled trial methods. Published studies and guidelines generally support report content, including clinical history, examination quality, description of findings, comparison, and diagnosis. Important report attributes include accuracy, clarity, and certainty. There is wide variation in the language used to describe imaging findings and diagnostic certainty. Survey participants strongly preferred reports with structured or itemized formats, but few studies exist regarding the effect of report structure on quality.
Authors:
Felicity Pool; Stacy Goergen
Related Documents :
24358883 - Paradoxical immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome due to toxoplasmic encephalitis...
19013763 - Poor reporting of search strategy and conflict of interest in over 250 narrative and sy...
24617583 - Image association: report of two cases in siblings with adrenal hypoplasia and review o...
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article; Review    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR     Volume:  7     ISSN:  1558-349X     ISO Abbreviation:  J Am Coll Radiol     Publication Date:  2010 Aug 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2010-08-03     Completed Date:  2011-01-12     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  101190326     Medline TA:  J Am Coll Radiol     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  634-43     Citation Subset:  IM    
Copyright Information:
Copyright 2010 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Affiliation:
Quality Use of Diagnostic Imaging Program, Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists, Sydney, Australia. fjpool.work@gmail.com
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:
Documentation / statistics & numerical data*
Guideline Adherence / statistics & numerical data*
Periodicals as Topic / statistics & numerical data*
Practice Guidelines as Topic*
Radiology / statistics & numerical data*

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  Advanced search of the electronic medical record: augmenting safety and efficiency in radiology.
Next Document:  William Duane.