Audit of demand for after-hours CT scanning services in RANZCR-accredited training departments.

INTRODUCTION: The aims of this study were to measure: (i) the growth in after-hours emergency department--referred CT (ED-CT) performed in accredited training departments between 2011 and 2013; (ii) the growth in ED CT relative to growth in ED presentations at the same hospitals; and (iii) trainee workload resulting from after-hours ED CT. METHODS: Ethics approval was obtained for all participating sites. Accredited training facilities in Australia and New Zealand with three or more trainees and serving one or more EDs were invited to participate (N = 32). Four nights were surveyed between August and December 2013. For data collection, the number of ED patients having one or more CT scans; ED CT scan total images; non-contrast head CTs; and ED patients (total and categories 1 and 2) attending the ED in the preceding 24 h and first half of calendar year were collected for 2013 and corresponding days in 2012 and 2011. Trainee staffing levels were measured. RESULTS: Eleven of 32 sites provided data for all four nights and 14 of 32 for one or more nights. A 15.7% increase in number of ED CTs between 1700 and 2200 h and 16.8% increase between 2201 and 0730 h occurred in the 2 years between 2011 and 2013 compared with a 6.9% increase in overall ED and 26% increase in categories 1 and 2 presentations over the same period. The number of CT images, however, increased 23%. CONCLUSION: Growth in demand by EDs for after-hours CT services has implications for service provision and trainee workloads in Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists-accredited training departments.

Impact of Interactive e-Learning Modules on Appropriateness of Imaging Referrals: A Multicenter, Randomized, Crossover Study.

PURPOSE: Health care expenditure on diagnostic imaging investigations is increasing, and many tests are ordered inappropriately. Validated clinical decision rules (CDRs) for certain conditions are available to aid in assessing the need for imaging. However, awareness and utilization of CDRs are lacking. This study compared the efficacy and perceived impact of interactive e-learning modules versus static versions of CDRs, for learning about appropriate imaging referrals. METHODS: A multicenter, randomized, crossover trial was performed; participants were volunteer medical students and recent graduates. In week 1, group 1 received an e-learning module on appropriate imaging referrals for pulmonary embolism; group 2 received PDF versions of relevant CDRs, and an online quiz with feedback. In week 2, the groups crossed over, focusing on imaging referrals for cervical spine trauma in adults. Online assessments were administered to both groups at the end of each week, and participants completed an online questionnaire at the end of the trial. RESULTS: Group 1 (e-learning module) performed significantly better on the pulmonary embolism knowledge assessment. After the crossover, participants in group 2 (e-learning module) were significantly more likely to improve their scores in the assessment of cervical spine trauma knowledge. Both groups gave positive evaluations of the e-learning modules. CONCLUSIONS: Interactive e-learning was significantly more effective for learning in this cohort, compared with static CDRs. We believe that the authentic clinical scenarios, feedback, and integration provided by the e-learning modules contributed to their impact. This study has implications for implementation of e-learning tools to facilitate appropriate referrals for imaging investigations in clinical practice.

Evidence-based guideline for the written radiology report: methods, recommendations and implementation challenges.

The written radiology report is the dominant method by which radiologists communicate the results of diagnostic and interventional imaging procedures. It has an important impact on decisions about further investigation and management. Its form and content can be influential in reducing harm to patients and mitigating risk for practitioners but varies markedly with little standardisation in practice. Until now, the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists has not had a guideline for the written report. International guidelines on this subject are not evidence based and lack description of development methods. The current guideline seeks to improve the quality of the written report by providing evidence-based recommendations for good practice. The following attributes of the report are addressed by recommendations: Content Clinical information available to the radiologist at the time the report was created Technical details of the procedure Examination quality and limitations Findings (both normal and abnormal) Comparison with previous studies Pathophysiological diagnosis Differential diagnoses Clinical correlation and/or answer to the clinical question Recommendations, particularly for further imaging and other investigations Conclusion/opinion/impression Format Length Format Language Confidence and certainty Clarity Readability Accuracy Communication of discrepancies between an original verbal or written report and the final report Proofreading/editing of own and trainee reports.

A tool to measure whether business management capacity in general practice impacts on the quality of chronic illness care.

Our aim was to develop a tool to identify specific features of the business and financial management of practices that facilitate better quality care for chronic illness in primary care. Domains of management were identified, resulting in the development of a structured interview tool that was administered in 97 primary care practices in Australia. Interview items were screened and subjected to factor analysis, subscales identified and the overall model fit determined. The instrument's validity was assessed against another measure of quality of care. Analysis provided a four-factor solution containing 21 items, which explained 42.5% of the variance in the total scores. The factors related to administrative processes, human resources, marketing analysis and business development. All scores increased significantly with practice size. The business development subscale and total score were higher for rural practices. There was a significant correlation between the business development subscale and quality of care. The indicators of business and financial management in the final tool appear to be useful predictors of the quality of care. The instrument may help inform policy regarding the structure of general practice and implementation of a systems approach to chronic illness care. It can provide information to practices about areas for further development.

Quality of chronic disease care in general practice: the development and validation of a provider interview tool.

BACKGROUND: This article describes the development and psychometric evaluation of an interview instrument to assess provider-reported quality of general practice care for patients with diabetes, cardiovascular disease and asthma--the Australian General Practice Clinical Care Interview (GPCCI). METHODS: We administered the GPCCI to 28 general practitioners (family physicians) in 10 general practices. We conducted an item analysis and assessed the internal consistency of the instrument. We next assessed the quality of care recorded in the medical records of 462 of the general practitioners' patients with Type 2 diabetes, ischaemic heart disease/hypertension and/or moderate to severe asthma. This was then compared with results of the GPCCI for each general practice. RESULTS: Good internal consistency was found for the overall GPCCI (Cronbach's alpha = 0.75). As far as the separate sub-scales were concerned, diabetes had good internal consistency (0.76) but the internal consistency of the heart disease and asthma subscales was not strong (0.49 and 0.16 respectively). There was high inter-rater reliability of the adjusted scores of data extracted from patients' medical notes for each of the three conditions. Correlations of the overall GPCCI and patients' medical notes audit, combined across the three conditions and aggregated to practice level, showed that a strong relationship (r = 0.84, p = 0.003) existed between the two indices of clinical care. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the GPCCI has good internal consistency and concurrent validity with patients' medical records in Australian general practice and warrants further evaluation of its properties, validity and utility.

Team climate for innovation: what difference does it make in general practice?

OBJECTIVE: Teamwork in primary healthcare is associated with patient care processes and staff outcomes. The ability of teams to be innovative is a hypothesized mechanism. We examined the characteristics of general practices with good team climate for innovation, and assessed the impact of climate on chronically ill patients' assessment of their care and on the job satisfaction of the staff. DESIGN: Large cross-sectional study. SETTING: Australian general practices. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 654 general practitioners and staff and 7505 chronically ill patients from 93 general practices in 6 Australian states and territories. MEASURES: The Team Climate Inventory and the Overall Job Satisfaction Scale, customized for use with general practices, were administered to general practitioners and practice staff, and the General Practice Assessment Survey was administered to patients. Practice characteristics were collected by survey from the principal doctor or practice manager. RESULTS: Mean scores of team climate in Australian general practices were similar to those reported in the UK, except that in our study there was no association between the number of doctors in a practice and their team climate. Better team climate was found in practices with fewer non-clinical staff. Team climate predicted the job satisfaction of the general practitioners and staff, irrespective of the number of practice staff. Better team climate was associated with greater satisfaction by patients with their care. CONCLUSIONS: Team climate is important for patient and staff satisfaction. In large general practices, separate sub-cultures may exist between administrative and clinical staff, which has implications for designing effective team interventions.