Initial outcomes from federally mandated accreditation site surveys of advanced diagnostic imaging facilities performed by the ACR.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the findings of the first year of validation site surveys performed by the ACR pursuant to new federal accreditation requirements for nonhospital advanced diagnostic imaging (ADI) facilities. METHODS: In the first year of validation site surveys (November 2012 to November 2013), the ACR surveyed 943 ADI facilities across 21 states. Data were extracted from these site survey reports and analyzed on the basis of the survey outcomes and the frequency and type of deficiencies and recommendations. Follow-up data were obtained from the ACR for facilities deemed noncompliant on the site survey to determine if these facilities adequately took the corrective actions necessary to maintain accreditation. RESULTS: Of the 943 ADI facilities surveyed, 45% (n = 421) were deemed compliant with the ACR accreditation standards, and 55% (n = 522) had one or more deficiencies. Failure to produce the required personnel documentation and absence of mandatory written policies were the two most common causes of deficiencies. Facilities accredited in more modalities tended to fare better in the site surveys, with the number of accredited modalities at a facility negatively associated with the likelihood of a deficiency (P = .007). Of the facilities with deficiencies, 73% (n = 382) took the necessary corrective actions to maintain accreditation, 27% (n = 140) were in the process of taking corrective actions, and no facility has lost accreditation because of an inability to adequately address the deficiencies. Nonbinding recommendations were made to 37% (n = 346) of facilities, and facilities with deficiencies were statistically more likely to receive recommendations (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Initial site surveys of ADI facilities demonstrated a high proportion of deficient facilities, but no facility has lost accreditation because of an inability to correct these deficiencies. Knowledge of the most common sources of deficiencies and recommendations can assist ACR-accredited ADI facilities in better preparing for validation site surveys, reducing the likelihood of facility noncompliance.

ACR guidance document on MR safe practices: 2013.

Because there are many potential risks in the MR environment and reports of adverse incidents involving patients, equipment and personnel, the need for a guidance document on MR safe practices emerged. Initially published in 2002, the ACR MR Safe Practices Guidelines established de facto industry standards for safe and responsible practices in clinical and research MR environments. As the MR industry changes the document is reviewed, modified and updated. The most recent version will reflect these changes.

The ACR guideline on communication: to be or not to be, that is the question.

The ACR has published more than 160 guidelines to assist radiologists in quality practice. One of the most controversial guidelines is on communication, first adopted more than a decade ago. This guideline is coming up for reconsideration and perhaps revision by the ACR Council at the ACR AMCLC in Washington, DC, in May 2010. In preparation for that reconsideration, the authors reviewed the guideline and its impact since last modified 5 years ago. The review shows that communication is still an important issue in radiology and that the guideline has played an overall beneficial role.

Diagnostic radiology reporting and communication: the ACR guideline.

The ACR adopted its "Guideline for Communication: Diagnostic Radiology" in 1991. Since its adoption, the guideline has been the subject of considerable discussion and controversy. In response to more than a decade of debate, the ACR appointed a task force in the summer of 2003 to research and analyze claims and litigation decisions that have been related to the communication or reporting of imaging studies by radiologists. Furthermore, the task force was charged with making recommendations regarding the status and impact of the existing communication guideline. The only specific directions to the task force were to take into account the ACR's motto, "Quality is our image," in the recognition that communication plays an essential role in safety and quality. The task force consulted outside legal counsel, reviewed claims data from many sources, and performed a survey of the ACR's membership. Furthermore, the task force was divided into four working groups to focus on the data and make specific recommendations. The products of the working groups were assembled into a final report that was presented to the ACR Board of Chancellors in the winter of 2004. This report, including five recommendations, and a draft for a new communication guideline were presented to the ACR Council at the annual meeting in May 2004.