1
|
Pesapane F, Tantrige P, De Marco P, Carriero S, Zugni F, Nicosia L, Bozzini AC, Rotili A, Latronico A, Abbate F, Origgi D, Santicchia S, Petralia G, Carrafiello G, Cassano E. Advancements in Standardizing Radiological Reports: A Comprehensive Review. MEDICINA (KAUNAS, LITHUANIA) 2023; 59:1679. [PMID: 37763797 PMCID: PMC10535385 DOI: 10.3390/medicina59091679] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/17/2023] [Revised: 08/18/2023] [Accepted: 09/14/2023] [Indexed: 09/29/2023]
Abstract
Standardized radiological reports stimulate debate in the medical imaging field. This review paper explores the advantages and challenges of standardized reporting. Standardized reporting can offer improved clarity and efficiency of communication among radiologists and the multidisciplinary team. However, challenges include limited flexibility, initially increased time and effort, and potential user experience issues. The efforts toward standardization are examined, encompassing the establishment of reporting templates, use of common imaging lexicons, and integration of clinical decision support tools. Recent technological advancements, including multimedia-enhanced reporting and AI-driven solutions, are discussed for their potential to improve the standardization process. Organizations such as the ACR, ESUR, RSNA, and ESR have developed standardized reporting systems, templates, and platforms to promote uniformity and collaboration. However, challenges remain in terms of workflow adjustments, language and format variability, and the need for validation. The review concludes by presenting a set of ten essential rules for creating standardized radiology reports, emphasizing clarity, consistency, and adherence to structured formats.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Filippo Pesapane
- Breast Imaging Division, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy; (L.N.); (A.C.B.); (A.R.); (F.A.); (E.C.)
| | - Priyan Tantrige
- Department of Radiology, King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London SE5 9RS, UK;
| | - Paolo De Marco
- Medical Physics Unit, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy; (P.D.M.); (D.O.)
| | - Serena Carriero
- Postgraduate School of Radiodiagnostics, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy;
| | - Fabio Zugni
- Division of Radiology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy; (F.Z.); (G.P.)
| | - Luca Nicosia
- Breast Imaging Division, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy; (L.N.); (A.C.B.); (A.R.); (F.A.); (E.C.)
| | - Anna Carla Bozzini
- Breast Imaging Division, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy; (L.N.); (A.C.B.); (A.R.); (F.A.); (E.C.)
| | - Anna Rotili
- Breast Imaging Division, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy; (L.N.); (A.C.B.); (A.R.); (F.A.); (E.C.)
| | - Antuono Latronico
- Breast Imaging Division, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy; (L.N.); (A.C.B.); (A.R.); (F.A.); (E.C.)
| | - Francesca Abbate
- Breast Imaging Division, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy; (L.N.); (A.C.B.); (A.R.); (F.A.); (E.C.)
| | - Daniela Origgi
- Medical Physics Unit, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy; (P.D.M.); (D.O.)
| | - Sonia Santicchia
- Foundation IRCCS Cà Granda-Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, 20122 Milan, Italy; (S.S.); (G.C.)
| | - Giuseppe Petralia
- Division of Radiology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy; (F.Z.); (G.P.)
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy
| | - Gianpaolo Carrafiello
- Foundation IRCCS Cà Granda-Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, 20122 Milan, Italy; (S.S.); (G.C.)
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy
| | - Enrico Cassano
- Breast Imaging Division, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy; (L.N.); (A.C.B.); (A.R.); (F.A.); (E.C.)
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Clinical Routine and Necessary Advances in Soft Tissue Tumor Imaging Based on the ESSR Guideline: Initial Findings. Tomography 2022; 8:1586-1594. [PMID: 35736879 PMCID: PMC9228892 DOI: 10.3390/tomography8030131] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2022] [Revised: 06/06/2022] [Accepted: 06/13/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Soft tissue sarcomas are malignant diseases with a complex classification and various histological subtypes, mostly clinically inconspicuous appearance, and a rare occurrence. To ensure safe patient care, the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR) issued a guideline for diagnostic imaging of soft tissue tumors in adults in 2015. In this study, we investigated whether implementation of these guidelines resulted in improved MRI protocol and report quality in patients with soft tissue sarcomas in our cancer center. All cases of histologically confirmed soft tissue sarcomas that were treated at our study center from 2006 to 2018 were evaluated retrospectively. The radiological reports were examined for their compliance with the recommendations of the ESSR. Patients were divided into two groups, before and after the introduction of the 2015 ESSR guidelines. In total, 103 cases of histologically confirmed sarcomas were studied. The distribution of, age, gender, number of subjects, performing radiology, and MRI indication on both groups did not show any significant differences. Only using the required MRI sequences showed a significant improvement after the introduction of the guidelines (p = 0.048). All other criteria, especially the requirements for the report of findings, showed no improvement. The guidelines of the European Society for Musculoskeletal Radiology are not regularly followed, and their establishment did not consistently improve MRI quality in our study group. This poses a risk for incorrect or delayed diagnosis and, ultimately, therapy of soft tissue tumors. However, this study is the first of its kind and involves a limited collective. A European-wide multicenter study would be appreciated to confirm these results.
Collapse
|
3
|
Radiologist Productivity Analytics: Factors Impacting Abdominal Pelvic CT Exam Reporting Times. J Digit Imaging 2022; 35:87-97. [PMID: 35013824 PMCID: PMC8921423 DOI: 10.1007/s10278-021-00548-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/25/2020] [Revised: 10/29/2021] [Accepted: 11/12/2021] [Indexed: 10/19/2022] Open
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.
Collapse
|
4
|
Shaish H. Structured prostate MRI reporting: how and why. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2020; 45:3969-3973. [PMID: 32918578 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-020-02720-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/26/2020] [Revised: 08/13/2020] [Accepted: 08/21/2020] [Indexed: 01/02/2023]
Abstract
Over the past decade, the Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) has revolutionized the manner in which prostate cancer is screened for, detected, biopsied, and managed. The single greatest contribution of PI-RADS has been the standardization of interpretation and reporting of findings on MRI of the prostate. This standardization has led to the wide acceptance of the PI-RADS lexicon at a time when structured reporting templates are becoming more widespread in radiology and other medical fields. The author reviews the benefits of structured reporting templates with a focus on prostate MRI, prior studies on this topic, and details of a suggested template.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hiram Shaish
- Department of Radiology, Columbia University Medical Center, 630 West 168th Street, New York, NY, 10016, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Caputo JM, Pina LA, Sebesta EM, Shaish H, Wenske S. Innovative standardized reporting template for prostate mpMRI improves clarity and confidence in the report. World J Urol 2020; 39:2447-2452. [PMID: 33079251 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-020-03487-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2020] [Accepted: 10/07/2020] [Indexed: 11/28/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The goal of the current study was to evaluate the effect of a standardized prostate mpMRI reporting template on urologists' understanding and confidence in counselling a patient on the results of the MRI. To do this we performed a survey study to assess the understanding and confidence of urologists reviewing reports prior to (pre) and after (post) adoption of a standardized mpMRI template. METHODS Six urologists reviewed ten pre- and post- mpMRI templated reports and completed a survey to assess the clarity of key elements and the confidence in counseling the patient. The urologists were blinded to the study objective. Nonparametric constrained permutation test for significance was performed to compare the results prior to and after implementation of the template. RESULTS 29 pre- and 30 post-template mpMRI reports were reviewed. The average score for the post-template reports was significantly higher (10.7 ± 0.6 vs 7.5 ± 2.7 [ p< 0.001]) regardless of the reviewer. Urologists were also overall more confident in counselling patients when the standardized mpMRI reporting template had been used. CONCLUSION Implementation of a standardized template for reporting of prostate mpMRI findings resulted in improved clarity and confidence in counselling patients. Radiologists should consider implementing a standardized reporting template to improve clinicians' understanding and confidence of the report.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joseph M Caputo
- Department of Urology, Columbia University Medical Center, 161 Fort Washington Avenue 11th Floor, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
| | - Luis A Pina
- Department of Urology, Columbia University Medical Center, 161 Fort Washington Avenue 11th Floor, New York, NY, 10032, USA
| | - Elisabeth M Sebesta
- Department of Urology, Columbia University Medical Center, 161 Fort Washington Avenue 11th Floor, New York, NY, 10032, USA
| | - Hiram Shaish
- Department of Radiology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sven Wenske
- Department of Urology, Columbia University Medical Center, 161 Fort Washington Avenue 11th Floor, New York, NY, 10032, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Evidence of the benefits, advantages and potentialities of the structured radiological report: An integrative review. Artif Intell Med 2019; 102:101770. [PMID: 31980107 DOI: 10.1016/j.artmed.2019.101770] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2018] [Revised: 11/21/2019] [Accepted: 11/24/2019] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
The structured report is a new trend for the preparation and manipulation of radiological examination reports. The structuring of the radiological report data can bring many benefits and advantages over other existing methodologies. Research and studies about the structured radiological report are highly relevant in clinical and academic subjects, improving medical practice, reducing unobserved problems by radiologists, improving reporting practices and medical diagnoses. Exposing the benefits, advantages and potential of the structured radiological report is important in encouraging the acceptance and implementation of this method by radiology professionals who are still somewhat resistant. The present review highlights the factors that contribute to the consolidation of adopting the structured radiology report methodology, addressing a variety of studies focused on the structuring of the radiological report. This integrative review of the literature is proposed by searching publications and journals databases (CAPES - Coordination of Improvement of Higher-Level Personnel, SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online, and PubMed - Publisher Medline) to develop a complete and unified understanding of the subject, so that it becomes a major part of evidence-based initiatives.
Collapse
|
7
|
Impact of a Structured Reporting Template on Adherence to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 and on the Diagnostic Performance of Prostate MRI for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer. J Am Coll Radiol 2018; 15:749-754. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2018.01.034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2017] [Revised: 01/15/2018] [Accepted: 01/23/2018] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
|