Time Requirement and Feasibility of a Systematic Quality Peer Review of Reporting in Radiology.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the human resources required for a retrospective quality review of different percentages of all routine diagnostic procedures in the Department of Radiology at Bern University Hospital, Switzerland. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three board-certified radiologists retrospectively evaluated the quality of the radiological reports of a total of 150 examinations (5 different examination types: abdominal CT, chest CT, mammography, conventional X-ray images and abdominal MRI). Each report was assigned a RADPEER score of 1 to 3 (score 1: concur with previous interpretation; score 2: discrepancy in interpretation/not ordinarily expected to be made; score 3: discrepancy in interpretation/should be made most of the time). The time (in seconds, s) required for each review was documented and compared. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to calculate the total workload for reviewing different percentages of the total annual reporting volume of the clinic. RESULTS: Among the total of 450 reviews analyzed, 91.1 % (410/450) were assigned a score of 1 and 8.9 % (40/450) were assigned scores of 2 or 3. The average time (in seconds) required for a peer review was 60.4 s (min. 5 s, max. 245 s). The reviewer with the greatest clinical experience needed significantly less time for reviewing the reports than the two reviewers with less clinical expertise (p < 0.05). Average review times were longer for discrepant ratings with a score of 2 or 3 (p < 0.05). The total time requirement calculated for reviewing all 5 types of examination for one year would be more than 1200 working hours. CONCLUSION: A retrospective peer review of reports of radiological examinations using the RADPEER system requires considerable human resources. However, to improve quality, it seems feasible to peer review at least a portion of the total yearly reporting volume. KEY POINTS: · A systematic retrospective assessment of the content of radiological reports using the RADPEER system involves high personnel costs.. · The retrospective assessment of all reports of a clinic or practice seems unrealistic due to the lack of highly specialized personnel.. · At least part of all reports should be reviewed with the aim of improving the quality of reports.. CITATION FORMAT: · Maurer MH, Brönnimann M, Schroeder C et al. Time Requirement and Feasibility of a Systematic Quality Peer Review of Reporting in Radiology. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2021; 193: 160 - 167.

Radiology in the Era of Value-based Healthcare: A Multi-Society Expert Statement from the ACR, CAR, ESR, IS3R, RANZCR, and RSNA.

Background The Value-Based Healthcare (VBH) concept is designed to improve individual healthcare outcomes without increasing expenditure, and is increasingly being used to determine resourcing of and reimbursement for medical services. Radiology is a major contributor to patient and societal healthcare at many levels. Despite this, some VBH models do not acknowledge radiology's central role; this may have future negative consequences for resource allocation. Methods, findings and interpretation This multi-society paper, representing the views of Radiology Societies in Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, describes the place of radiology in VBH models and the health-care value contributions of radiology. Potential steps to objectify and quantify the value contributed by radiology to healthcare are outlined. Published under a CC BY 4.0 license.

Parental Leave and Neuroradiology Fellowships.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A uniform policy on parental leave in radiology training programs is lacking. Although previous publications have addressed the status of parental leave policy among radiology residency programs, the state of parental leave in radiology fellowships has not been addressed to date. Our aim was to determine the state of parental leave policies in American neuroradiology fellowship programs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An Internet survey was sent to the directors of neuroradiology fellowship programs listed on the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Web site (n = 87) in January 2020. The questionnaire assessed the policies of the fellowship programs and Program Directors' attitudes toward maternal and paternal leave. Four reminders were sent during the 3 weeks before closing data collection. RESULTS: The response rate was 76% (66/87). Ninety-four percent (62/66) of program directors claimed to have a maternal leave policy, of which 51/62 (82%) were written and 53/62 (85%) were paid. Additionally, 77% (51/66) had a policy for paternal leave, of which 80% (41/51) were written and 76% (39/51) were paid. The average length of paid leave was 6.7 ± 3.25 weeks for new mothers and 2.9 ± 2 weeks for new fathers. Unpaid leave was mostly based on the Family and Medical Leave Act. Fellows were responsible for making up call duties during the parental leave in 47% of the programs. Radiation exposure was restricted in 89% of the programs during pregnancy. Policies addressed breast feeding and untraditional parenthood in just 41% of the responding programs. Most program directors supported the development of a unified national policy on maternal (83%) and paternal (79%) leave. CONCLUSIONS: Most neuroradiology fellowship programs have explicit maternal and paternal leave policies that grant paid leave to trainees. Some also offer unpaid leave, mostly through Family and Medical Leave Act guidelines. A uniform policy derived from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and/or American Board of Radiology would be useful and overwhelmingly accepted.

CO-score; a new method for quality assessment of radiology reports.

INTRODUCTION: Studies on assessing radiology reports commonly calculates sensitivity, specificity and accuracy, which estimates if the observer has tendency to overdiagnose, overlook pathology, or both. This pilot study examines a new method for assessing the quality of radiology reports, based on the patients' clinical outcome. METHODS: Two observers evaluated five hundred reports by four experienced reporting radiographers on X-ray images of the appendicular skeleton. The observers categorised the reports as true or false and gradated the quality of the report from 1 to 3 based on the patients' clinical outcome. We developed a new performance score, called the Consequence of Clinical Outcome (CO-score), which combines the amount of incorrect reports and the severity of errors, to assess the overall quality of the reports. A low CO-score represents high quality with few or inconsiderate errors. RESULTS: The results showed no direct connection between high accuracy and low CO-score. All radiographers achieved high levels of accuracy (range: 96.8%-100%) but varied in CO-score (range: 0.00-0.14). One radiographer achieved an accuracy of 97.6% but a high CO-score of 0.14 as four reports had clinical consequence for the patients and five reports lacked minor details. One report was classified as true positive but was inadequate and led to wrong treatment. CONCLUSION: This study shows that true reports can affect the patients' clinical outcome and reports classified as false can represent insignificant errors. The new CO-score gives a more nuanced view of the reporting quality by including the patients' clinical outcome in the performance score. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: We suggest that the CO-score is included as a supplement to the common methods in future studies assessing the quality of radiology reports as well as in clinical audits.

Optimising patient care in medical radiation services through health economics: an introduction.

The role of health economics in optimising patient care in medical radiation clinical settings is of increasing importance in ensuring efficient and effective service delivery. This commentary introduces health economics to medical radiation professionals by outlining the main analysis types utilised, highlighted by examples in the literature. The purpose is to provide an over-arching framework and starting point for incorporating health economics into medical radiation research study protocols.

The economics of quality and safety in radiology: Accreditation programs and landmark legislation.

Quality and patient safety are essential to the practice of radiology. "Quality is our image" is the slogan for the American College of Radiology (ACR), which has embraced the quality and safety movement as a central tenet. The impact of advances in radiology on diagnosis and management of complex medical disorders cannot be understated. Nevertheless, these revolutionary technologies do come at a cost. Increasing utilization of advanced imaging in emergency departments throughout the country poses challenges both in terms of appropriate use and management of radiation dose. The indispensable place advanced imaging plays in diagnosis has necessitated guidelines and accountability to protect patients and radiology staff. In this series, we have created a concise discourse on what we have determined to be the essentials of the economics of quality and safety as it pertains to radiology. In this first article, we summarize the accreditation programs in radiology, their legislative background, and the associated financial and market responses that have subsequently resulted. We discuss the progression from historical predecessors to the passage of the Mammography Quality and Safety Act (MQSA), which served as a model for subsequent laws governing the quality and safety of other imaging modalities. These laws have had real economic implications for radiology practices seeking to meet new increasingly stringent guidelines. We also break down the costs of participation in the ACR accreditation and center of excellence programs.

Coding and Legal Issues in Obstetric and Gynecologic Ultrasound.

This article addresses coding and liability related to obstetric and gynecologic ultrasound examinations. The coding section includes an overview of general concepts, highlighting the differences between coding in hospital-owned facilities and provider-owned clinics. It also addresses the importance of correct International Classification of Diseases, 10th edition, coding, emphasizing the use of the most specific applicable codes. This section discusses proper coding and applicable parameters for early pregnancy and gynecologic ultrasound examination. The liability section addresses common errors leading to litigation in obstetric and gynecologic ultrasound practice. Examples are given demonstrating how such errors lead to liability actions.

A survey assessment of reporting radiographers' scope of practice in the West Midlands region of the United Kingdom.

INTRODUCTION: Radiographers have been providing reporting solutions for a number of years. Given the persistent radiologist vacancies and the increased demand on imaging services, the utilisation of reporting radiographers is widespread across England. Capacity and demand issues may lead to reporting boundaries being extended. The aim was to generate an updated appraisal of participants' scopes of practice in the West Midlands of region of England. METHOD: Reporting radiographers at 11 healthcare institutions across the West Midlands region were invited to participate in an online survey. Topics covered included reporting scope of practice, onward referrals and suggestion of treatments. Descriptive statistics were generated in Microsoft Excel and free responses were analysed manually. RESULTS: Response rate was 47% (40/86). The majority (n = 34, 85%) report Emergency Department skeletal examinations, only 12 (30%) report adult chests and only three (8%) report paediatric chests. Of those permitted to refer to other modalities, 85% (n = 23/27) actively do so. Of those permitted to refer to specialist teams, 97% (n = 31/32) actively do so. Only 23% of all participants (n = 9/40) suggest treatments in their reports. CONCLUSION: An increased number of participants report chest and abdominal examinations than previously identified. Restrictions in paediatric scopes of practice and adult GP chest examinations are also evident. Participants stated they do include recommendations in their reports by referring to other modalities and for specialist opinions. Suggesting treatment is not common practice and is considered an area for further advancement.

Radiographer reporting: A literature review to support cancer workforce planning in England.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical Imaging contributes to screening, diagnosis, planning and monitoring of treatment and surveillance in cancer care. This literature review summarises evidence about radiographer reporting to help imaging service providers respond to Health Education England's 2017 Cancer Workforce Plan project to expand radiographer reporting in clinical service provision. KEY FINDINGS: Papers published between 1992 and 2018 were reviewed (n = 148). Evidence related to dynamic examinations (fluoroscopy, ultrasound) and mammography was excluded. Content was analysed and summarised using the following headings: clinical scope of practice, responsibilities, training, assessment, impact in practice and barriers to expansion. Radiographer reporting is well established in the United Kingdom. Scope of practice varies individually and geographically. Deployment of appropriately trained reporting radiographers is helping the NHS maintain high quality clinical imaging service provision and deliver a cost-effective increase in diagnostic capacity. CONCLUSION: Working within multiprofessional clinical imaging teams, within a defined scope of practice and with access to medical input when required, reporting radiographers augment capacity in diagnostic pathways and release radiologist time for other complex clinical imaging responsibilities.

Clinical decision support: practical implementation at two pediatric hospitals.

Clinical decision support has been identified by the United States government as a method to decrease inappropriate imaging exams and promote judicious use of imaging resources. The adoption of this method will be incentivized by requiring appropriate use criteria to qualify for Medicare reimbursement starting in January 2020. While Medicare reimbursement is unlikely to directly impact pediatric imaging because of largely disparate patient populations, insurance providers typically use Medicare to benchmark their reimbursement guidelines. Therefore soon after their adoption these guidelines could become relevant to pediatric imaging. In this article we discuss how pediatric imaging was initially underrepresented in the clinical decision support realm, and how this was addressed by a subcommittee involving both American College of Radiology and Society for Pediatric Radiology members. We also present the experience of implementing clinical decision support software at two standalone pediatric hospitals and summarize the lessons learned from these deployments.

PRELIMINARY STAFF DOSE ASSESSMENT FOR COMMON FLUOROSCOPY GUIDED PROCEDURES AT KORLE-BU TEACHING HOSPITAL, ACCRA, GHANA.

Preliminary studies on effective and eye lens doses of six Radiologists, four Cardiologists have been conducted for a period of 3 months. Electronic dosemeters positioned under and over lead apron of staff were used for the dosimetry. The estimated effective dose per month to Cardiologist and Radiologist were 0.01-0.07 mSv and 0.03-0.14 mSv, respectively. The estimated eye lens doses per month to Cardiologists and Radiologists were also 0.15-0.30 mSv and 0.53-3.39 mSv, respectively. The effective doses per month to staff were below the ICRP acceptable limit of 1.67 mSv/month but the upper limit of the range of estimated eye lens dose exceeded the ICRP acceptable limit by a factor of 2. Regular use of protective goggles and consistent eye lens dose monitoring is encouraged at the hospital for dose optimization.

Clinicians' perceptions of the quality of outsourced radiology and actions taken around perceived imaging errors in practice.

OBJECTIVES: Outsourcing of radiological reporting services has fundamentally altered communication between radiologists and clinicians in clinical decision making, which relies heavily on diagnostic imaging. The aim of this study was to understand clinicians' perspectives and experiences of interpretation of outsourced reports in clinical practice, if the author of imaging reports matters to clinicians, and actions taken to deal with perceived errors. METHODS: A printed survey was distributed to a purposive sample of 50 of the 250 senior medical and surgical staff of a large National Health Service hospital in the UK who regularly engaged with the Radiology Department between May and October 2017, representing 20% of this hospital workforce. The survey consisted of ten questions examining clinicians' opinions on radiology reporting, with comment options to encourage respondents to give further detail. Participants were requested to return the survey to the study investigators. RESULTS: The survey elicited a 100% response rate (n = 50). A constant comparative framework was used to guide analysis, revealing themes relevant to the ongoing inter-professional relationship between clinicians and radiologists. The disparity between in-house and externally sourced radiology reports and underlying issues of trust surrounding outsourced reports were the most significant themes identified. CONCLUSIONS: This study found outsourcing of radiology reporting needs multi-disciplinary team availability regarding the interpretation and discussions around capacity for effective communication. It raises important issues around often under-acknowledged additional workloads imposed on in-house radiologists. There are financial and pragmatic clinical aspects in pathways of radiology practice which require further research and examination. KEY POINTS: • Utilisation of outsourcing is increasing in practice in response to imaging demands. • Outsourcing increases departmental primary reporting capacity but may increase the workload of the local radiologist. • The development of strategies for outsourcing examinations may lessen demands on the in-house workforce.

The Fellowship of the Royal College of Radiologists (FRCR) examination: a review of the evidence.

The Fellowship of the Royal College of Radiologists (FRCR) examination is the professional qualification that is essential for career progression in clinical radiology within the UK. It is also important for career progression in many countries internationally. The FRCR has evolved and changed over the last decade. In this systematic review we appraise and summarise the available data relating to the FRCR emphasising the published evidence regarding the validity, reliability, and acceptability of this examination. Comparison is made to other equivalent medical examinations, as well as a more recently published commissioned external review of the FRCR examinations. The Clinical Radiology Part 2B (CR2B) examination in its pre-existing format is reliable, valid, and acceptable. Recommendations from the commissioned external review are based primarily on expert opinion, with a limited evidence base comprising data from a small sample acquired during a single examination sitting and without peer review. Unlike the CR2B examination, there is little evidence regarding assessment of the CR1 and CR2 examinations. Both the CR1 and CR2 examinations are currently in the process of undergoing major changes to their formats. Blueprinting items to the curriculum might improve acceptability. Other changes may improve transparency and reliability of these assessments. Our analysis and many aspects of the external review may provide pointers regarding how the upcoming data produced by the "automated" FRCR examinations can be further analysed to provide a more robust evaluation.

Left ventricular MRI wall motion assessment by monogenic signal amplitude image computation.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is the commonly used technique for the assessment of left ventricular (LV) function. Apart manually or semi-automatically contouring LV boundaries for quantification of By visual interpretation of cine images, assessment of regional wall motion is performed by visual interpretation of cine images, thus relying on an experience-dependent and subjective modality. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work is to describe a novel algorithm based on the computation of the monogenic amplitude image to be utilized in conjunction with conventional cine-MRI visualization to assess LV motion abnormalities and to validate it against gold standard expert visual interpretation. METHODS: The proposed method uses a recent image processing tool called "monogenic signal" to decompose the MR images into features, which are relevant for motion estimation. Wall motion abnormalities are quantified locally by measuring the temporal variations of the monogenic signal amplitude. The new method was validated by two non-expert radiologists using a wall motion scoring without and with the computed image, and compared against the expert interpretation. The proposed approach was tested on a population of 40 patients, including 8 subjects with normal ventricular function and 32 pathological cases (20 with myocardial infarction, 9 with myocarditis, and 3 with dilated cardiomyopathy). RESULTS: The results show that, for both radiologists, sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of cine-MRI alone were similar and around 59%, 77%, and 71%, respectively. Adding the proposed amplitude image while visualizing the cine MRI images significantly increased both sensitivity, specificity and accuracy up to 75%, 89%, and 84%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Accuracy of wall motion interpretation adding amplitude image to conventional visualization was proven feasible and superior to standard image interpretation on the considered population, in inexperienced observers. Adding the amplitude images as a diagnostic tool in clinical routine is likely to improve the detection of myocardial segments presenting a cardiac dysfunction.

Health professionals' and coroners' views on less invasive perinatal and paediatric autopsy: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess health professionals' and coroners' attitudes towards non-minimally and minimally invasive autopsy in the perinatal and paediatric setting. METHODS: A qualitative study using semistructured interviews. Data were analysed thematically. RESULTS: Twenty-five health professionals (including perinatal/paediatric pathologists and anatomical pathology technologists, obstetricians, fetal medicine consultants and bereavement midwives, intensive care consultants and family liaison nurses, a consultant neonatologist and a paediatric radiologist) and four coroners participated. Participants viewed less invasive methods of autopsy as a positive development in prenatal and paediatric care that could increase autopsy rates. Several procedural and psychological benefits were highlighted including improved diagnostic accuracy in some circumstances, potential for faster turnaround times, parental familiarity with imaging and laparoscopic approaches, and benefits to parents and faith groups who object to invasive approaches. Concerns around the limitations of the technology such not reaching the same levels of certainty as full autopsy, unsuitability of imaging in certain circumstances, the potential for missing a diagnosis (or misdiagnosis) and de-skilling the workforce were identified. Finally, a number of implementation issues were raised including skills and training requirements for pathologists and radiologists, access to scanning equipment, required computational infrastructure, need for a multidisciplinary approach to interpret results, cost implications, equity of access and acceptance from health professionals and hospital managers. CONCLUSION: Health professionals and coroners viewed less invasive autopsy as a positive development in perinatal and paediatric care. However, to inform implementation a detailed health economic analysis and further exploration of parental views, particularly in different religious groups, are required.

Historic Physician Quality and Reporting System Reporting by Radiologists: A Wake-up Call to Avoid Penalties Under the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (MACRA).

PURPOSE: The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (MACRA) Quality performance category is the successor to the Physician Quality and Reporting System (PQRS) program and now contributes to physicians' income adjustments based upon performance rates calculated for a minimum of six measures. We assess radiologists' frequency of reporting PQRS measures as a marker of preparedness for MACRA. METHODS: Medicare-participating radiologists were randomly searched through the Physician Compare website until identifying 1,000 radiologists who reported at least one PQRS measure. Associations were explored between the number of reported measures and radiologist characteristics. RESULTS: For PQRS-reporting radiologists, the number of reported PQRS measures was 1 (25.2%), 2 (27.3%), 3 (18.2%), 4 (19.3%), 5 (8.3%), and 6 (1.7%). The most commonly reported measures were "documenting radiation exposure time for procedures using fluoroscopy" (64.3%) and "accurate measurement of carotid artery narrowing" (56.8%). Reporting at least two measures was significantly (P < .001) more likely for nonacademic (77.3%) versus academic (44.9%) radiologists, generalists (82.7%) versus subspecialists (59.1%), and radiologists in smaller (≤9 members) (84.7%) versus larger (≥100 members) (39.7%) practices. Reporting six measures was significantly (P < .05) more likely for generalists (2.6%) versus subspecialists (0.4%). CONCLUSION: Most PQRS-reporting radiologists reported only one or two measures, well below MACRA's requirement of six. Radiologists continuing such reporting levels will likely be disadvantaged in terms of potential payment adjustments under MACRA. Lower reporting rates for academic and subspecialized radiologists, as well as those in larger practices, may relate to such radiologists' reliance on their hospitals or networks for PQRS reporting. Qualified clinical data registries should be embraced to facilitate more robust measure reporting.