Quality of radiologists’ communication with other clinicians—As experienced by radiologists

Fatahi, Nabi; Krupić, Ferid; Hellström, Mikael

doi:10.1016/j.pec.2015.02.009

Cited by 36 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Solely one single percentage (1/198) of females had been asked for the possibility of pregnancy, which is a part of needed documentation according to guidelines (Akintomide & Ikpeme, 2014). Another shortcoming of clinical information in the referral, which was considered to be of significance in the patient history, was that it was rarely specified whether the patient had been subject to high energy or low energy trauma (Fatahi, Krupic & Hellström, 2015). Creatinine value was missing in 87% (293/337) of cases when needed, which may be a crucial piece of clinical information (Troude et al, 2013).…”

Section: Inadequate Clinical Information and Poor History Takingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, it was found that vaguely formulated questions (for example "abnormal findings?") were also a factor that could contribute to poorer quality of referrals (Fatahi et al, 2015). Another study also pointed out the lack of a specific question as a contributing to deficient referrals (Landry et al, 2011).…”

Section: Otterberg Gunnerödmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Abbreviations can have several different meanings depending on where the referral originates. This was considered problematic because an abbreviation may easily be misinterpreted (Fatahi et al, 2015). One study defined abbreviations as one main reason for defective referrals.…”

Section: Abbreviationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When referrers order exams electronically, there are often a lack of specific headings programmed for each stage of the referral. For example, focus group interviews with radiologists reveal that if a finger is to be examined, the referrer chooses "hand" as an anatomical region and does not always specify in the clinical information that it is just one finger (Fatahi, Krupic, & Hellström, 2015). Information about specific body parts for examination was respectively lacking in 31% (63/202) (Afolabi et al, 2009) and 27% (91/337) of the referrals (Troude et al, 2013).…”

Section: Non-specific Body Part In the Desired Examinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Factors that may contribute to an inadequate radiology request form

Otterberg

Gunneröd

2019

RadOpen

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The radiology request/referral is an important part of the communication between the referring physician and the radiology department. It forms the basis for radiologists and radiographers to be able to carry out their work. Through the radiologic request form, the referrer orders an examination for a patient, as part of the patient's medical examination or follow-up. In conjunction with education and practice, we have noticed that reduced quality of the referrals is not uncommon. The aim was to identify the main contributing factors to unjustified referrals for diagnostic imaging procedures. A literature review was undertaken. Analyzing the literature, the overall themes emerged, and resulted in five subcategories; 1) insufficient, inaccurate or lack of clinical information or questioning, 2) weaknesses in choosing the desired modality, 3) missing routines and 4) need for further standardization of the referring-practice, and 5) insufficient knowledge of radiological diagnostics on behalf of the referring physicians. Weaknesses in clinical history and questioning were the most frequently presented contributing factors.

show abstract

Section: Inadequate Clinical Information and Poor History Takingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Otterberg Gunnerödmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Abbreviationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Non-specific Body Part In the Desired Examinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Factors that may contribute to an inadequate radiology request form

Otterberg

Gunneröd

2019

RadOpen

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Imaging orders placed electronically through radiology information systems have been found to contain more pertinent historical information than paper requisitions . Several prior studies have noted that the presence of such information improves the accuracy of radiologists' image interpretation and is often lacking in both paper and free‐text electronic imaging requisitions . Although CDS systems appear to be effective in optimizing imaging utilization, few studies have examined the effect on subsequent patient clinical outcomes.…”

Section: Proposed Research Agenda To Optimize Patient‐centered Diagnomentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimizing Patient‐centered Communication and Multidisciplinary Care Coordination in Emergency Diagnostic Imaging: A Research Agenda

Sabbatini

Merck

Froemming

et al. 2015

Academic Emergency Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patient-centered emergency diagnostic imaging relies on efficient communication and multispecialty care coordination to ensure optimal imaging utilization. The construct of the emergency diagnostic imaging care coordination cycle with three main phases (pretest, test, and posttest) provides a useful framework to evaluate care coordination in patient-centered emergency diagnostic imaging. This article summarizes findings reached during the patient-centered outcomes session of the 2015 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference "Diagnostic Imaging in the Emergency Department: A Research Agenda to Optimize Utilization." The primary objective was to develop a research agenda focused on 1) defining component parts of the emergency diagnostic imaging care coordination process, 2) identifying gaps in communication that affect emergency diagnostic imaging, and 3) defining optimal methods of communication and multidisciplinary care coordination that ensure patient-centered emergency diagnostic imaging. Prioritized research questions provided the framework to define a research agenda for multidisciplinary care coordination in emergency diagnostic imaging.

show abstract

IMPACT (Information Medically Pertinent in Acute Computed Tomography) requests: Delphi study to develop criteria standards for adequate clinical information in computed tomography requests in the Australian emergency department

Castillo

Steffens

Livesay

et al. 2022

J of Medical Radiation Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Inadequate clinical information in medical imaging requests negatively affects the clinical relevance of imaging performed and the quality of resultant radiology reports. Currently, there are no published Australian guidelines on what constitutes adequate clinical information in computed tomography (CT) requests. This study aimed to determine specific items of clinical information radiologists require in CT requests for acute chest, abdomen and blunt trauma examinations, to support optimal reporting. Methods A panel of 24 CT‐reporting consultant radiologists participated in this e‐Delphi consensus study. Panellists undertook multiple online survey rounds of open‐ended, dichotomous and Likert scale questions, receiving feedback following each. Round 1 responses formulated lists for each CT examination. Round 2 set a threshold of 80% agreement after dichotomous scoring. Round 3 accepted items which averaged 4 or more on a 5‐point Likert scale. Round 4 required panellists to rank items within the aggregated, accepted lists, based on panellists' perceived level of usefulness. Results The large numbers of round 1 items (chest: 101, abdomen: 76, blunt trauma: 80) were rationalised and grouped into categories to facilitate efficiency during subsequent rounds. Twenty‐three chest, 24 abdomen and 17 blunt trauma items met the 80% agreement threshold in round 2. Items below threshold were included in round 3; numbering 44, 19 and 23 for chest, abdomen and blunt trauma, respectively. Through the e‐Delphi process, we formulated clinical information criteria standards for three CT types. Conclusions The developed standards will guide Australian referrers in providing adequate clinical information in CT requests, to support optimal reporting, diagnosis and treatment.

show abstract

Quality of radiologists’ communication with other clinicians—As experienced by radiologists

Cited by 36 publications

References 32 publications

Factors that may contribute to an inadequate radiology request form

Factors that may contribute to an inadequate radiology request form

Optimizing Patient‐centered Communication and Multidisciplinary Care Coordination in Emergency Diagnostic Imaging: A Research Agenda

IMPACT (Information Medically Pertinent in Acute Computed Tomography) requests: Delphi study to develop criteria standards for adequate clinical information in computed tomography requests in the Australian emergency department

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About