Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Automated Tracking of Follow-Up Imaging Recommendations.
Mabotuwana, Thusitha; Hall, Christopher S; Hombal, Vadiraj; Pai, Prashanth; Raghavan, Usha Nandini; Regis, Shawn; McKee, Brady; Dalal, Sandeep; Wald, Christoph; Gunn, Martin L.
Afiliação
  • Mabotuwana T; Radiology Solutions, Philips Healthcare, 22100 Bothell Everett Hwy, Bothell, WA 98021.
  • Hall CS; Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
  • Hombal V; Radiology Solutions, Philips Healthcare, 22100 Bothell Everett Hwy, Bothell, WA 98021.
  • Pai P; Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
  • Raghavan UN; Clinical Informatics Solutions and Services, Philips Research, Cambridge, MA.
  • Regis S; Radiology Solutions, Philips Healthcare, 22100 Bothell Everett Hwy, Bothell, WA 98021.
  • McKee B; Radiology Solutions, Philips Healthcare, 22100 Bothell Everett Hwy, Bothell, WA 98021.
  • Dalal S; Lahey Hospital and Medical Center, Burlington, MA.
  • Wald C; Lahey Hospital and Medical Center, Burlington, MA.
  • Gunn ML; Lahey Hospital and Medical Center, Burlington, MA.
AJR Am J Roentgenol ; 212(6): 1287-1294, 2019 Jun.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30860895
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE. Radiology reports often contain follow-up imaging recommendations. Failure to comply with these recommendations in a timely manner can lead to poor patient outcomes, complications, and legal liability. As such, the primary objective of this research was to determine adherence rates to follow-up recommendations. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Radiology-related examination data, including report text, for examinations performed between June 1, 2015, and July 31, 2017, were extracted from the radiology departments at the University of Washington (UW) and Lahey Hospital and Medical Center (LHMC). The UW dataset contained 923,885 examinations, and the LHMC dataset contained 763,059 examinations. A 1-year period was used for detection of imaging recommendations and up to 14-months for the follow-up examination to be performed. RESULTS. On the basis of an algorithm with 97.9% detection accuracy, the follow-up imaging recommendation rate was 11.4% at UW and 20.9% at LHMC. Excluding mammography examinations, the overall follow-up imaging adherence rate was 51.9% at UW (range, 44.4% for nuclear medicine to 63.0% for MRI) and 52.0% at LHMC (range, 30.1% for fluoroscopy to 63.2% for ultrasound) using a matcher algorithm with 76.5% accuracy. CONCLUSION. This study suggests that follow-up imaging adherence rates vary by modality and between sites. Adherence rates can be influenced by various legitimate factors. Having the capability to identify patients who can benefit from patient engagement initiatives is important to improve overall adherence rates. Monitoring of follow-up adherence rates over time and critical evaluation of variation in recommendation patterns across the practice can inform measures to standardize and help mitigate risk.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article