Readability assessment of internet-based patient education materials related to mammography for breast cancer screening.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The US Department of Health and Human Services (USDHHS) recommends that Internet-based patient education materials (IPEMs) be written below the sixth-grade reading level to target the average American adult. This study was designed to determine the readability of IPEMs regarding mammography for breast cancer screening. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three-hundred mammography-related Web sites were reviewed for IPEMs. Forty-two IPEMs that met the Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct were assessed for readability level with four readability indices that use existing algorithms based on word and sentence length to quantitatively analyze Internet sources for language intricacy including the following: Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and Gunning Frequency of Gobbledygook (Gunning FOG; GFOG). Results were compared to national recommendations, and intergroup analysis was performed. RESULTS: No IPEMs (0%) regarding mammography were written at or below the sixth-grade reading level, based on FKGL. The mean readability scores were as follows: FRES, 49.04 ± 10.62; FKGL, 10.71 ± 2.01; SMOG, 13.33 ± 1.67; and Gunning FOG, 14.32 ± 2.18. These scores indicate that the readability of mammography IPEMs is written at a "difficult" level, significantly above the recommended sixth-grade reading level (P < .05) determined by the USDHHS. CONCLUSIONS: IPEMs related to mammography are written well above the recommended sixth-grade level and likely reflect other IPEMs in diagnostic radiology.

Non-spinal musculoskeletal malpractice suits against radiologists in the USA--rates, anatomic locations, and payments in a survey of 8,265 radiologists.

The objective of this study was to present the characteristics of non-spinal musculoskeletal malpractice suits with attention to rates, anatomic location, and payments in a survey of 8,265 radiologists. The malpractice histories of 8,265 radiologists from 36 states were evaluated from credentialing data required of all radiologists participating in the network of One Call Medical, Inc., a broker for imaging tests in workmen's compensation cases. Twenty six hundred of the 8,265 radiologists (31.5 %) had at least one suit. Of the 4,741 total claims, 627 (13.2 %) were related to the bones and soft tissues. Four hundred seventeen (66.1 %) of them involved the musculoskeletal system other than the spine. A cause was known for 400. Of these, 91.8 % (367/400) resulted from an alleged failure to diagnose. The foot was the most common site with a rate 6.00 cases/1,000 radiologist's person years (95 % confidence interval (CI), 4.68-7.68), and the hip was second with a rate of 5.30 cases/1,000 person years (95 % CI, 4.15-6.76). The highest median payment related to ankle injuries with a median settlement of $72,500 (interquartile range (IQR), $40,000-$161,250). The state in which the highest median settlement occurred was Maryland ($125,000; IQR, $95,000-$230,000)) whereas Utah had the highest rate of suits (5.24 cases per 1,000 person years; CI, 3.03-9.04). Claims regarding foot and hip injury were the most common, but ankle settlements incurred the highest awards.

Malpractice suits in chest radiology: an evaluation of the histories of 8265 radiologists.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to present rates of claims, causes of error, percentage of cases resulting in a judgment, and average payments made by radiologists in chest-related malpractice cases in a survey of 8265 radiologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The malpractice histories of 8265 radiologists were evaluated from the credentialing files of One-Call Medical Inc., a preferred provider organization for computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging in workers' compensation cases. RESULTS: Of the 8265 radiologists, 2680 (32.4%) had at least 1 malpractice suit. Of those who were sued, the rate of claims was 55.1 per 1000 person years. The rate of thorax-related suits was 6.6 claims per 1000 radiology practice years (95% confidence interval, 6.0-7.2). There were 496 suits encompassing 48 different causes. Errors in diagnosis comprised 78.0% of the causes. Failure to diagnose lung cancer was by far the most frequent diagnostic error, representing 211 cases or 42.5%. Of the 496 cases, an outcome was known in 417. Sixty-one percent of these were settled in favor of the plaintiff, with a mean payment of $277,230 (95% confidence interval, 226,967-338,614). CONCLUSIONS: Errors in diagnosis, and among them failure to diagnose lung cancer, were by far the most common reasons for initiating a malpractice suit against radiologists related to the thorax and its contents.

Spinal-related malpractice suits against radiologists in the USA-rates, anatomic location, percent of adverse judgments, and average payments.

To present overall rates, anatomic location, percent of adverse settlements to the radiologists, and average payments to the plaintiff in spinal-related malpractice suits in a survey of 8,265 radiologists. The malpractice histories of 8,265 radiologists from 36 states were evaluated from credentialing data required of all radiologists participating in the network of One Call Medical Incorporated, a broker for CT/MR in workmen's compensation cases. Two hundred twenty-six of the 8,265 radiologists (31.5 %) had at least one suit. Of the 4,741 total claims, 627 (13.2 %) were related to the bones and adjacent soft tissue. Two hundred and ten (32.9 %) involved the spine. Of these, 70.2 % (134/191) were settled in favor of the plaintiff. One hundred and sixteen (68.2 %) involved the cervical spine with an average settlement of $483,156. Lumbar cases accounted for 28 (16.5 %) of spinal suits, with an average settlement of $119,272. Thoracic cases (26) accounted for only 15.3 % of spinal cases and had an average settlement of $481,608. An allegation of spinal malpractice resulting in a settlement or judgment against the radiologist occurred at a rate of 29.5 cases per 1,000 radiologists' person years. Of the three spinal regions, the cervical spine was the most frequent anatomic site of a malpractice suit and among all those cases settled incurred the highest payment in judgment to the plaintiff.