Longitudinal imaging history in early identification of intimate partner violence.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the imaging findings of intimate partner violence (IPV)-related injury and to evaluate the role of longitudinal imaging review in detecting IPV. METHODS: Radiology studies were reviewed in chronological order and IPV-related injuries were recorded among 400 victims of any type of abuse (group 1) and 288 of physical abuse (group 2) from January 2013 to June 2018. The likelihood of IPV was assessed as low/moderate/high based on the review of (1) current and prior anatomically related studies only and (2) longitudinal imaging history consisting of all prior studies. The first radiological study date with moderate/high suspicion was compared to the self-reported date by the victim. RESULTS: A total of 135 victims (33.8%) in group 1 and 144 victims (50%) in group 2 demonstrated IPV-related injuries. Musculoskeletal injury was most common (58.2% and 44.5% in groups 1 and 2, respectively; most commonly lower/upper extremity fractures), followed by neurologic injury (20.9% and 32.9% in groups 1 and 2, respectively; most commonly facial injury). With longitudinal imaging history, radiologists were able to identify IPV in 31% of group 1 and 46.5% of group 2 patients. Amongst these patients, earlier identification by radiologists was provided compared to the self-reported date in 62.3% of group 1 (median, 64 months) and in 52.6% of group 2 (median, 69.3 months). CONCLUSIONS: Musculoskeletal and neurological injuries were the most common IPV-related injuries. Knowledge of common injuries and longitudinal imaging history may help IPV identification when victims are not forthcoming. KEY POINTS: • Musculoskeletal injuries were the most common type of IPV-related injury, followed by neurological injuries. • With longitudinal imaging history, radiologists were able to better raise the suspicion of IPV compared to the selective review of anatomically related studies only. • With longitudinal imaging history, radiologists were able to identify IPV earlier than the self-reported date by a median of 64 months in any type of abuse, and a median of 69.3 months in physical abuse.

Upper extremity fractures due to intimate partner violence versus accidental causes.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the prevalence of intimate partner violence (IPV)-related upper extremity fractures (UEF) in women presenting to US emergency departments (ED) and compare their anatomic location to those due to accidental falls or strikes. METHODS: An Institutional Review Board exempt, retrospective review of prospectively collected data was performed using the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System's All Injury Program data from 2005 through 2015 for all UEF sustained in women 15 to 54 years old. Injuries based on reported IPV versus accidental falls or strikes were analyzed accounting for the weighted, stratified nature of the data. RESULTS: IPV-related UEF represented 1.7% of all UEF and 27.2% of all IPV fractures. The finger was the most common fracture site in IPV (34.3%) and accidental striking (53.3%) but accounted for only 10% of fall-related UEF. There was a higher proportion of shoulder fractures in IPV (9.2%) compared to accidental falls (7.4%) or strikes (2.9%). The odds of a finger fracture were 4.32 times greater in IPV than falling and of a shoulder fracture were 3.65 greater in IPV than accidental striking (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: While the finger is the most common site for IPV UEF, it is also the most common location for accidental striking. A lower proportion of finger fractures in fall and of shoulder/forearm fractures in accidental striking should prompt the radiologist to discuss the possibility of IPV with the ED physician in any woman presenting with a finger fracture due to fall and a shoulder/forearm fracture with a vague history of accidental striking.

Facial injury patterns in victims of intimate partner violence.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the imaging findings of facial injuries in patients reporting intimate partner violence (IPV). METHODS: A retrospective review of radiology studies performed for 668 patients reporting IPV to our institution's violence prevention support program identified 96 patients with 152 facial injuries. Demographics, imaging findings, and clinical data obtained from a review of the electronic medical records (EMR) were analyzed to categorize injury patterns. RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 93 women and 3 men with a mean age of 35 years (range 19-76; median 32). At the time of presentation, 57 (59.3%) patients reported IPV as the mechanism of injury. The most frequent site of injury was the midface, seen in 65 (67.7%) patients. The most common fracture sites were the nasal bones (45/152, 29.6%), followed by the mandible (17/152, 11.1%), and orbits (16/152, 10.5%). Left-sided injuries were more common (90/152; 59.2%). A vast majority of fractures (94.5%) showed minimal or no displacement. Over one-third of injuries (60/152, 39.4%) demonstrated only soft tissue swelling or hematoma without fracture. Associated injuries were seen most frequently in the upper extremity, occurring synchronously in 11 (11.4%) patients, and preceding the index facial injury in 20 (21%) patients. CONCLUSION: /advances in knowledge. The midface was the most frequent location of injury in victims of intimate partner violence, and the nasal bone was the most commonly fractured facial bone. Recognizing these injury patterns can help radiologists suspect IPV and prompt them to discuss the possibility of IPV with the clinical providers.

Exacerbation of Physical Intimate Partner Violence during COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a global social and public health problem, but published literature regarding the exacerbation of physical IPV during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is lacking. Purpose To assess the incidence, patterns, and severity of injuries in IPV victims during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 compared with the prior 3 years. Materials and Methods The demographics, clinical presentation, injuries, and radiologic findings of patients reporting physical abuse arising from IPV during the statewide COVID-19 pandemic between March 11 and May 3, 2020, were compared with data from the same period for the past 3 years. Pearson χ2 and Fisher exact tests were used for analysis. Results A total of 26 victims of physical IPV from 2020 (mean age, 37 years ± 13 [standard deviation]; 25 women) were evaluated and compared with 42 victims of physical IPV (mean age, 41 years ± 15; 40 women) from 2017 to 2019. Although the overall number of patients who reported IPV decreased during the pandemic, the incidence of physical IPV was 1.8 times greater (95% CI: 1.1, 3.0; P = .01). The total number of deep injuries was 28 during 2020 versus 16 from 2017 to 2019; the number of deep injuries per victim was 1.1 during 2020 compared with 0.4 from 2017 to 2019 (P < .001). The incidence of high-risk abuse defined by mechanism was two times greater in 2020 (95% CI: 1.2, 4.7; P = .01). Patients who experienced IPV during the COVID-19 pandemic were more likely to be White; 17 (65%) victims in 2020 were White compared with 11 (26%) in the prior years (P = .007). Conclusion There was a higher incidence and severity of physical intimate partner violence (IPV) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic compared with the prior 3 years. These results suggest that victims of IPV delayed reaching out to health care services until the late stages of the abuse cycle during the COVID-19 pandemic. © RSNA, 2020.

Upper extremity injuries in the victims of intimate partner violence.

OBJECTIVES: To recognize most common patterns of upper extremity (UE) injuries in victims of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV). METHODS: Radiological review of 308 patients who reported physical IPV at our institution from January 2013 to June 2018, identified 55 patients with 88 unique UE injuries. Demographic data and injury patterns and associations were collected from the electronic medical records. RESULTS: The cohort included 49 females and 6 males (age 19-63, mean 38). At the time of injury, IPV was reported in 15/88 (17%) and IPV screening was documented for 22/88 (25%) injuries. There were 46 fractures, 8 dislocations or subluxations, and 34 isolated soft tissue injuries, most commonly involving the hand (56/88). Fractures most commonly involved the fingers (21/46, 46%) and the 5th digit (8/27, 30%). Medial UE fractures (5th digit, 4th digit) constituted 44% of hand and finger fractures (12/27) and 26% of all fractures (12/46). Comminuted and displaced fractures were rare (8/46, 17%). Head and face injuries were the most common concomitant injuries (9/22, 41%) and subsequent injuries (21/61, 35%). Of 12 patients with recurrent UE injuries, 6 had recurrent injuries of the same hand. Five of 6 non-acute fractures (83%) were of the hand. CONCLUSIONS: Hand and finger injuries are the most common UE injuries in patients with IPV, with finger being the most common site and medial hand the most common region of fracture. Repeated injuries involving the same site and a combination of medial hand and head or face injuries could indicate IPV. KEY POINTS: • Upper extremity injuries in victims of intimate partner violence are most commonly seen in the hand and fingers. • Fingers are the most common site of fracture and the medial hand is the most common region of fracture in the upper extremity in victims of intimate partner violence. • In intimate partner violence victims with upper extremity injuries, concomitant injuries and subsequent injuries are most commonly seen in the head and neck region.

Peer Learning in Radiology: Effect of a Pay-for-Performance Initiative on Clinical Impact and Usage.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to assess the effects of a pay-for-performance (PFP) initiative on clinical impact and usage of a radiology peer learning tool. MATERIALS AND METHODS. This retrospective study was performed at a large academic hospital. On May 1, 2017, a peer learning tool was implemented to facilitate radiologist peer feedback including clinical follow-up, positive feedback, and consultation. Subsequently, PFP target numbers for peer learning tool alerts by subspecialty divisions (October 1, 2017) and individual radiologists (October 1, 2018) were set. The primary outcome was report addendum rate (percent of clinical follow-up alerts with addenda), which was a proxy for peer learning tool clinical impact. Secondary outcomes were peer learning tool usage rate (number of peer learning tool alerts per 1000 radiology reports) and proportion of clinical follow-up alerts (percent of clinical follow-ups among all peer learning tool alerts). Outcomes were assessed biweekly using ANOVA and statistical process control analyses. RESULTS. Among 1,265,839 radiology reports from May 1, 2017, to September 29, 2019, a total of 20,902 peer learning tool alerts were generated. The clinical follow-up alert addendum rate was not significantly different between the period before the PFP initiative (9.9%) and the periods including division-wide (8.3%) and individual (7.9%) PFP initiatives (p = .55; ANOVA). Peer learning tool usage increased from 2.2 alerts per 1000 reports before the PFP initiative to 12.6 per 1000 during the division-wide PFP period (5.7-fold increase; 12.6/2.2), to 25.2 in the individual PFP period (11.5-fold increase vs before PFP; twofold increase vs division-wide) (p < .001). The clinical follow-up alert proportion decreased from 37.5% before the PFP initiative, to 34.4% in the division-wide period, to 31.3% in the individual PFP period. CONCLUSION. A PFP initiative improved radiologist engagement in peer learning by marked increase in peer learning tool usage rate without a change in report addendum rate as a proxy for clinical impact.

Field Hospital Boston Hope: Defining Culture During Uncertainty.

As hospitals across the world realized their surge capacity would not be enough to care for patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) infection, an urgent need to open field hospitals prevailed. In this article the authors describe the implementation process of opening a Boston field hospital including the development of a culture unique to this crisis and the local community needs. Through first-person accounts, readers will learn (1) about Boston Hope, (2) how leaders managed and collaborated, (3) how the close proximity of the care environment impacted decision-making and management style, and (4) the characteristics of leaders under pressure as observed by the team.

Effect of a Report Template-Enabled Quality Improvement Initiative on Use of Preferred Phrases for Communicating Normal Findings in Structured Abdominal CT and MRI Reports.

OBJECTIVE. The objective of this study was to assess impact of a report template quality improvement (QI) initiative on use of preferred phrases for communicating normal findings in structured abdominal CT and MRI reports. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. This prospective QI initiative, designed to decrease use of equivocal phrases and increase use of preferred and acceptable phrases (defined by multidisciplinary experts including patient advocates) in radiology reports, was performed in an academic medical center with over 800,000 annual radiologic examinations and was exempt from institutional review board approval. The intervention populated the preferred term "normal" (default) and acceptable specified pertinent negative phrases (pick-list option) when describing abdominal organ subheadings (liver, pancreas, spleen, adrenal glands, kidneys) within the "Findings" heading of abdominal CT and MRI report templates. We tabulated frequencies of the term "normal", specified pertinent negatives, and equivocal phrases in 21,629 reports before (June 1, 2017, to February 28, 2018) and 23,051 reports after (April 1, 2018, to December 31, 2018) the intervention using natural language processing and recorded trainee participation in report generation. We assessed intervention impact using statistical process control (SPC) charts and the Fisher exact test. RESULTS. Equivocal phrases were used less frequently in abdominal CT and MRI reports for both attending radiologists and trainees after the intervention (p < 0.05, SPC). Use of the term "normal" increased for reports generated by attending radiologists alone but decreased for reports created with trainee participation (p < 0.05, SPC). Frequency of pertinent negatives increased for reports with trainee participation (p < 0.05, SPC). CONCLUSION. A QI intervention decreased use of equivocal terms and increased use of preferred and acceptable phrases when communicating normal findings in abdominal CT and MRI reports.

Intimate Partner Violence: A Primer for Radiologists to Make the "Invisible" Visible.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is the physical, sexual, or emotional violence between current or former partners. It is a major public health issue that affects nearly one out of four women. Nonetheless, IPV is greatly underdiagnosed. Imaging has played a significant role in identifying cases of nonaccidental trauma in children, and similarly, it has the potential to enable the identification of injuries resulting from IPV. Radiologists have early access to the radiologic history of such victims and may be the first to diagnose IPV on the basis of the distribution and imaging appearance of the patient's currrent and past injuries. Radiologists must be familiar with the imaging findings that are suggestive of injuries resulting from IPV. Special attention should be given to cases in which there are multiple visits for injury care; coexistent fractures at different stages of healing, which may help differentiate injuries related to IPV from those caused by a stranger; and injuries in defensive locations and target areas such as the face and upper extremities. The authors provide an overview of current methods for diagnosing IPV and define the role of the radiologist in cases of IPV. They also describe a successful diagnostic imaging-based approach for helping to identify IPV, with a specific focus on the associated imaging findings and mechanisms of injuries. In addition, current needs and future perspectives for improving the diagnosis of this hidden epidemic are identified. This information is intended to raise awareness among radiologists, with the ultimate goal of improving the diagnosis of IPV and thus reducing the devastating effects on victims' lives. ©RSNA, 2020.

Improving Patient Experience in Radiology: Impact of a Multifaceted Intervention on National Ranking.

Purpose To assess the impact of a patient experience improvement program on national ranking in patient experience in a large academic radiology department. Materials and Methods This Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant study was exempted from institutional review board approval. After initiating an electronic patient experience survey, 26 210 surveys and 22 213 comments were received from May 2017 to April 2018. During the study period, a multifaceted quality improvement initiative was instituted, focused on improving patient experience in the radiology department. The primary outcome was national percentile ranking as measured with the survey. Secondary outcome was the change in departmental percentile ranking compared with the overall hospital ranking for patient experience measured with a similar survey. Results The overall raw score for the department increased from 92.8 to 93.6 of 100 (P < .001), and the national ranking improved from the 35th to 50th percentile (P = .001). Improvements in raw scores related to personnel were primarily responsible for the increase in overall raw score and ranking. Of the 22 213 comments received, 3458 (15.6%) were negative. The percentage of negative comments was highly correlated with lower monthly percentile ranking (Pearson correlation coefficient of -0.69; P = .01). Conclusion It is feasible to develop a large-scale electronic survey to assess patient experience in the radiology department, to identify improvement opportunities, and to measurably improve patient experience. Changes in the percentage of negative comments were correlated with changes in a practice's national percentile rank in patient experience. © RSNA, 2019 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Kruskal and Sarwar in this issue.

Variation in Follow-up Imaging Recommendations in Radiology Reports: Patient, Modality, and Radiologist Predictors.

Background Variation between radiologists when making recommendations for additional imaging and associated factors are, to the knowledge of the authors, unknown. Clear identification of factors that account for variation in follow-up recommendations might prevent unnecessary tests for incidental or ambiguous image findings. Purpose To determine incidence and identify factors associated with follow-up recommendations in radiology reports from multiple modalities, patient care settings, and imaging divisions. Materials and Methods This retrospective study analyzed 318 366 reports obtained from diagnostic imaging examinations performed at a large urban quaternary care hospital from January 1 to December 31, 2016, excluding breast and US reports. A subset of 1000 reports were randomly selected and manually annotated to train and validate a machine learning algorithm to predict whether a report included a follow-up imaging recommendation (training-and-validation set consisted of 850 reports and test set of 150 reports). The trained algorithm was used to classify 318 366 reports. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the likelihood of follow-up recommendation. Additional analysis by imaging subspecialty division was performed, and intradivision and interradiologist variability was quantified. Results The machine learning algorithm classified 38 745 of 318 366 (12.2%) reports as containing follow-up recommendations. Average patient age was 59 years ± 17 (standard deviation); 45.2% (143 767 of 318 366) of reports were from male patients. Among 65 radiologists, 57% (37 of 65) were men. At multivariable analysis, older patients had higher rates of follow-up recommendations (odds ratio [OR], 1.01 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 1.01, 1.01] for each additional year), male patients had lower rates of follow-up recommendations (OR, 0.9; 95% CI: 0.9, 1.0), and follow-up recommendations were most common among CT studies (OR, 4.2 [95% CI: 4.0, 4.4] compared with radiography). Radiologist sex (P = .54), presence of a trainee (P = .45), and years in practice (P = .49) were not significant predictors overall. A division-level analysis showed 2.8-fold to 6.7-fold interradiologist variation. Conclusion Substantial interradiologist variation exists in the probability of recommending a follow-up examination in a radiology report, after adjusting for patient, examination, and radiologist factors. © RSNA, 2019 See also the editorial by Russell in this issue.

Improving Radiology Peer Learning: Comparing a Novel Electronic Peer Learning Tool and a Traditional Score-Based Peer Review System.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the yields of peer learning between a radiology electronic peer learning tool (PLT) and a score-based peer review (SBPR) system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study was performed from May 1, 2017, through October 31, 2017, at a 776-bed academic hospital performing more than 620,000 radiology examinations annually. Use of a PLT that generates alerts facilitating closed-loop feedback was initiated on March 1, 2017. Functions included providing peers with the following: clinical follow-up after review of prior reports, positive feedback, and consultation to solicit second opinions. In the same period, an SBPR system yielded the following scores: 1, agree with original interpretation; 2, minor discrepancy; 3, moderate discrepancy; and 4, major discrepancy. Potential learning opportunities were defined as cases receiving a clinical follow-up alert (PLT system) and reports scored 3 or 4 (SBPR system). Primary outcome was clinically significant feedback per total reports reviewed, measured as radiology report addendum rate (number with addenda divided by number of reports reviewed monthly for each system). The secondary outcome was potential learning opportunity rate (number of clinical follow-up alerts or reports scored 3 or 4 divided by the total number of radiology reports reviewed monthly). A paired t test was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: The overall PLT report addendum rate was 11.2% (23 addenda/206 reports) versus 0.27% (13 addenda/4861 reports) for SBPR (p = 0.03), a 41-fold difference (11.2/0.27). The potential learning opportunity rate for PLT was 50.0% (206 clinical follow-up alerts among 412 total alerts) versus 0.53% (26 scored 3 or 4 among 4861 reports reviewed) for SBPR (p = 0.00003), a 94-fold difference (50/0.53). CONCLUSION: A PLT improves radiology peer learning with a significantly higher yield of clinically significant feedback and potential learning opportunities compared with a traditional SBPR system.

Impact of an Information Technology-Enabled Quality Improvement Initiative on Timeliness of Patient Contact and Scheduling of Screening Mammography Recall.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of an information technology-enabled quality improvement initiative on timeliness of patient contact and scheduling of screening mammography recall. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The study was conducted in a screening practice (two ambulatory centers, A and B; two hospitals, C and D) that uses offline batch results (A, B, C) and same-day results (D) with on-site (A, C, D) or off-site (B) coordinators scheduling recalls. Before the intervention, radiologists at sites A, B, and C conveyed recalls via paper lists to coordinators after batch interpretation. At site D, coordinators received recall lists several times a day. In March 2017 an electronic alert system was implemented to notify coordinators of recall at report signing with required closed-loop acknowledgment once recall was scheduled. Mean time (hours, excluding weekends) to schedule diagnostic evaluation was compared for 4-month periods before and after intervention by two-tailed t test and statistical process control analyses. RESULTS. Recall rates were 9.5% (1356/14,315) before and 8.9% (1432/16,034) after the intervention (p = 0.10). Mean time to schedule screening decreased after the intervention as follows: site A from 86 to 65 hours (-24.4%, p = 0.01); site B, 116 to 70 hours (-39.7%, p < 0.0001); site C, 98 to 65 hours (-33.7%, p = 0.002); and site D, 49 to 42 hours (-14.3%, p = 0.21). Statistical process control analysis showed significant sustained improvements at sites A, B, and C in mean time to patient contact and scheduling of diagnostic evaluation. CONCLUSION. An information technology-enabled quality improvement initiative to notify coordinators of screening recalls in real time with required patient contact and scheduling acknowledgment reduced time to diagnostic scheduling in a multisite practice. The greatest impact was found at the site with off-site coordinators, the least at the site performing same-day interpretation.

Radiology Report Template Optimization at an Academic Medical Center.

OBJECTIVE. Variability in reports of the same imaging study performed at the same institution may be confusing to referrers and patients, hindering results communication. The purpose of this study was to introduce a quality improvement initiative aimed at reducing variation in radiology report templates at a large academic center. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The quality improvement initiative was undertaken at a large multisite, multidivision academic radiology practice performing more than 820,000 radiologic examinations annually. A project charter defined the goals, scope, and personnel of the initiative and an escalation pathway for conflict resolution. Standard requirements for templates were initially developed. From September 2017 to May 2018, an oversight committee (24 organ system and modality-based work groups with representatives from nine subspecialty divisions) reviewed and harmonized all institutional radiology report templates across the enterprise irrespective of the imaging site or division that interpreted the study. The primary outcome measure was percentage reduction in report templates after harmonization. The secondary outcome measure was monthly adherence to harmonized templates for 9 months after implementation assessed by manual review of 40 randomly selected reports per month. The paired t test was used to assess template reduction, and the chi-square trend test was used to study trend in adherence to harmonized templates. RESULTS. Among 19,687 total templates at baseline, 597 harmonized templates remained after harmonization (p < 0.001). There was variation in template reduction by work group (multiple p < 0.05; reduction range, 79.2-99.3%). Radiologist adherence to harmonized templates ranged from 88.0% to 100%, unchanged in the 9 months after implementation (p = 0.23, chi-square trend). CONCLUSION. A radiology report harmonization initiative reduced 97.0% of report templates with a sustained high degree of adherence to harmonized templates after implementation at a large multisite multidivision academic radiology practice.

Technologist Productivity and Accuracy in Assigning Protocols for Abdominal CT and MRI Examinations at an Academic Medical Center: Implications for Physician Workload.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the technologist productivity and accuracy in assigning protocols for abdominal CT and MRI examinations compared with a standard work flow whereby protocols are assigned by physicians. MATERIALS AND METHODS. In this quality improvement project at a large academic medical center, two CT technologists and two MRI technologists assigned protocols for examinations during a 15-week study period. The primary outcome measure was mean number of protocols assigned by technologists per hour. Secondary outcome measures were proportion of examinations with protocols assigned by technologists and rate of filing of quality assurance reports for protocols completed by technologists. A two-tailed t test was used to compare mean number of protocols; a chi-square test was used to compare proportions between CT and MRI. RESULTS. The mean number of protocols assigned by technologists per hour was not different between CT and MRI (CT, 22/h; MRI, 19/h; p = 0.28). CT and MRI technologist protocols accounted for 1650 of 4867 (33.9%) CT examinations (range, 23-275 per week) and 569 of 2388 (23.8%) MRI examinations (range, 0-95 per week) (p < 0.001). Radiologist quality assurance reports on inaccurate protocols were rare: three for CT (3/1650 [0.18%]), five for MRI (5/569 [0.88%]) (p = 0.017). A retrospective review of randomly selected CT and MRI protocols revealed no errors (80/80 correct). No patients were called back for repeat imaging due to protocol error. CONCLUSION. Technologists can efficiently and accurately assign protocols for abdominal CT and MRI examinations at an academic medical center, leading to increased radiologist time spent on other value-added activities.

JOURNAL CLUB: Structured Feedback From Patients on Actual Radiology Reports: A Novel Approach to Improve Reporting Practices.

OBJECTIVE: Patient perceptions of radiology reports are largely unknown. The objective of the present study is to describe our experience receiving structured feedback from patients on actual radiology reports as a means of improving reporting practices. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight reports (two for radiographs, two for ultrasound images, two for CT scans, and two for MR images) were randomly selected from our system for review. For each report, patients were asked to rate their level of comprehension, identify any problems in the report, and, in the free-text portion of the feedback form, indicate any questions about the report that they may have. Potentially confounding factors were also examined. RESULTS: A total of 104 patients (46 men and 58 women) participated in the study (for a total of 832 evaluations). The median score for report comprehension was 2.5 (on a scale of 1-5), with the most common problems affecting comprehension identified as "unclear or technical language" (mentioned in 59.6% of evaluations) and the report being "too long" (mentioned in 10.2% of evaluations). A request for an explanation of the report in lay terms (noted in 20.1% of evaluations) was the most common request mentioned in the free-text portion of the feedback form. An inverse relationship existed between report length and patient comprehension (p < 0.001). Patients who had prior experience with their own radiology reports indicated having greater comprehension than did patients with no prior experience (p = 0.003). No correlation between the educational status and report comprehension of the patients was identified (p = 0.488). CONCLUSION: Radiology reports are not well understood by patients, who identify technical language and the long length of reports as the most common problems affecting their comprehension. Longer reports tend to be less well understood.

Metrics for Radiologists in the Era of Value-based Health Care Delivery.

Accelerated by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, health care delivery in the United States is poised to move from a model that rewards the volume of services provided to one that rewards the value provided by such services. Radiology department operations are currently managed by an array of metrics that assess various departmental missions, but many of these metrics do not measure value. Regulators and other stakeholders also influence what metrics are used to assess medical imaging. Metrics such as the Physician Quality Reporting System are increasingly being linked to financial penalties. In addition, metrics assessing radiology's contribution to cost or outcomes are currently lacking. In fact, radiology is widely viewed as a contributor to health care costs without an adequate understanding of its contribution to downstream cost savings or improvement in patient outcomes. The new value-based system of health care delivery and reimbursement will measure a provider's contribution to reducing costs and improving patient outcomes with the intention of making reimbursement commensurate with adherence to these metrics. The authors describe existing metrics and their application to the practice of radiology, discuss the so-called value equation, and suggest possible metrics that will be useful for demonstrating the value of radiologists' services to their patients.

Radiologists' role in the communication of imaging examination results to patients: perceptions and preferences of patients.

OBJECTIVE: It has been suggested that radiology reporting practices would be improved if radiologists were to discuss the results of an examination directly with the patient. The attitudes and preferences of patients with regard to direct communication with the radiologist are not well-defined. The purpose of this study was to survey patients about their preferred method of receiving radiologic results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An anonymous survey was distributed to adult patients undergoing contrast-enhanced CT or MRI over a 2-week period in June 2013. RESULTS: The response rate was 58.4% (642 responses). For normal examination results, the preferred mode of communication was a telephone call from the ordering physician (34.1%); only 12% of respondents opted for a telephone call from the radiologist, and 2.6% chose a face-to-face meeting with the radiologist. For abnormal test results, the preferred mode of communication was also a telephone call from the ordering physician (49.8%); 14.4% of respondents selected a telephone call from the radiologist, and 8.3% chose a face-to-face meeting with the radiologist. Patients preferred receiving very detailed versions of radiology reports for both normal (46.4%) and abnormal (81.8%) test results. Patients also expressed a desire to have access to at least key images from their examinations. CONCLUSION: Patients prefer receiving both normal and abnormal examination results from the physicians who ordered the examination rather than the radiologist. They also prefer to receive very detailed examination results rather than a brief summary in lay terms.

Pixantrone dimaleate versus other chemotherapeutic agents as a single-agent salvage treatment in patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma: a phase 3, multicentre, open-label, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Pixantrone dimaleate (pixantrone)--a novel aza-anthracenedione--was synthesised to reduce anthracycline-related cardiotoxicity without compromising antitumour efficacy. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of pixantrone versus an investigator's choice of a single-agent therapy in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma. METHODS: In this phase 3, multicentre, open-label, randomised trial at 66 hospitals in Europe, India, Russia, South America, the UK, and the USA, patients with histologically confirmed aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma who had relapsed after two or more previous chemotherapy regimens were randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive voice response system to treatment with pixantrone dimaleate (85 mg/m(2) intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle, for up to six cycles) or to a comparator (vinorelbine, oxaliplatin, ifosfamide, etoposide, mitoxantrone, or gemcitabine) given at prespecified standard doses and schedules. Patients were stratified by region, International Prognostic Index score, and previous stem-cell transplantation. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment; however, an independent assessment panel was masked. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a complete or unconfirmed complete response in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population at the end of treatment. Primary analyses of efficacy were based on the independent assessment panel's data review. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00088530. FINDINGS: The ITT population comprised 70 patients randomly assigned to the pixantrone group and 70 to the comparator. Five patients (two in the pixantrone group and three in the comparator group) dropped out before receiving their study drug. 14 patients (20·0% [95% CI 11·4-31·3]) who received pixantrone achieved a complete or unconfirmed complete response at end of treatment compared with four patients (5·7% [1·6-14·0]) in the comparator group (p = 0·021). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events in patients given pixantrone were uncomplicated, non-cumulative neutropenia (28 [41·2%] of 68 patients vs 13 [19·4%] of 67 patients in the comparator group), leucopenia (16 [23·5%] vs five [7·5%]), and thrombocytopenia (eight [11·8%] vs seven [10·4%]). INTERPRETATION: Pixantrone, given as a single-agent salvage therapy in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma, is efficacious and tolerable. It could be a treatment option for patients whose aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma has failed to respond to at least two previous chemotherapy regimens. FUNDING: Cell Therapeutics, Inc.

Brown fat at PET/CT: correlation with patient characteristics.

PURPOSES: To assess the prevalence of brown fat in patients with cancer, compare demographic characteristics of those with and those without brown fat, and correlate these characteristics with the mean and maximum standardized uptake values of brown fat. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This case-control study was institutional review board approved and HIPAA compliant. Informed consent was waived. Reports of 12 195 consecutive positron emission tomography/computed tomography examinations performed in 6867 patients between January 2004 and November 2008 were reviewed for documented fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake in brown fat (n = 298). Control patients (n = 298) without brown fat were chosen and matched for age, sex, and month and year of examination. Age, sex, weight, body mass index, ethnicity, and examination stage (initial vs restaging) were compared between groups. Paired Student t test, χ(2) test, Pearson correlation coefficient, and analysis of variance were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Uptake of FDG in brown fat was demonstrated in 298 of 6867 (4.33%) patients. Prevalence of brown fat was significantly higher in female (5.9% [211 of 3587]) than in male patients (2.65% [87 of 3280]; P < .001). Those with brown fat had significantly lower body weight (147.5 lb ± 3.8 vs 168.61 lb ± 5.0; P < .001) and body mass index (24.3 ± 0.54 vs 27.6 ± 0.77; P < .001) than control patients. There was no significant difference in the prevalence of brown fat among ethnic groups. The maximum standardized uptake value of brown fat had a significant inverse correlation with age (r = -0.3, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Patients with brown fat were more likely to be female and thinner than those without brown fat. Younger patients were more likely to have higher maximum standardized uptake values of brown fat.