Survey of peer review programs among pediatric radiologists: report from the SPR Quality and Safety Committee.

During the last 15 years, peer review has been widely incorporated into radiology quality improvement programs. However, current implementations are variable and carry concerns, including subjectivity of numerical scores and a sense of merely satisfying regulatory requirements. The Society for Pediatric Radiology (SPR) Quality and Safety Committee sought to evaluate the state of peer review programs in pediatric radiology practices, including implementation methods, perceived functions, strengths and weaknesses, and opportunities for improvement. We distributed an online 16-question survey to SPR members. Questions pertained to the type of peer review system, the use of numerical scores and comments, how feedback on discordances is given and received, and the use of peer learning conferences. We collected 219 responses (15% of survey invitations), 80% of which were from children's hospitals. Fifty percent of respondents said they use a picture archiving and communication system (PACS)-integrated peer review system. Comment-enhanced feedback for interpretive discordances was either very important or somewhat important to performance improvement in 86% of responses, compared to 48% with a similar perception of numerical scores. Sixty-eight percent of respondents said they either rarely or never check their numerical scores, and 82% either strongly or somewhat agreed that comments are more effective feedback than numerical scores. Ninety-three percent either strongly or somewhat agreed that peer learning conferences would be beneficial to their practice. Forty-eight percent thought that their current peer review system should be modified. Survey results demonstrate that peer review systems in pediatric radiology practices are implemented variably, and nearly half of respondents believe their systems should be modified. Most respondents prefer feedback in the form of comments and peer learning conferences, which are thought to be more beneficial for performance improvement than numerical scores.

Pediatric brain MRI, Part 2: Advanced techniques.

Pediatric neuroimaging is a complex and specialized field that uses magnetic resonance (MR) imaging as the workhorse for diagnosis. MR protocols should be tailored to the specific indication and reviewed by the supervising radiologist in real time. Targeted advanced imaging sequences can be added to provide information regarding tissue microstructure, perfusion, metabolism and function. In part 2 of this review, we highlight the utility of advanced imaging techniques for superior evaluation of pediatric neurologic disease. We focus on the following techniques, with clinical examples: phase-contrast imaging, perfusion-weighted imaging, vessel wall imaging, diffusion tensor imaging, task-based functional MRI and MR spectroscopy.

Pediatric brain MRI part 1: basic techniques.

Pediatric neuroimaging is a complex and specialized field that uses magnetic resonance (MR) imaging as the workhorse for diagnosis. Standard MR techniques used in adult neuroimaging are suboptimal for imaging in pediatrics because there are significant differences in the child's developing brain. These differences include size, myelination and sulcation. MR protocols need to be tailored to the specific indication and reviewed by the supervising radiologist in real time, and the specialized needs of this population require careful consideration of issues such as scan timing, sequence order, sedation, anesthesia and gadolinium administration. In part 1 of this review, we focus on basic protocol development and anatomical characterization. We provide multiple imaging examples optimized for evaluation of supratentorial and infratentorial brain, midline structures, head and neck, and intracranial vasculature.

Survey of gadolinium-based contrast agent utilization among the members of the Society for Pediatric Radiology: a Quality and Safety Committee report.

BACKGROUND: Gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) have been used for magnetic resonance (MR) imaging over the last three decades. Recent reports demonstrated gadolinium retention in patients' brains following intravenous administration. Since gadolinium is a highly toxic heavy metal, there is a potential for adverse effects from prolonged retention or deposition, particularly in children. For this reason, the Society (SPR) for Pediatric Radiology Quality and Safety committee conducted a survey to evaluate the current status of GBCAs usage among pediatric radiologists. OBJECTIVE: To assess the usage of GBCAs among SPR members. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online 15-question survey was distributed to SPR members. Survey questions pertained to the type of GBCAs used, protocoling workflow, requirement of renal function or pregnancy tests, and various clinical indications for contrast-enhanced MRI examinations. RESULTS: A total of 163 survey responses were compiled (11.1% of survey invitations), the majority of these from academic institutions in the United States. Ninety-four percent reported that MR studies are always or usually protocoled by pediatric radiologists. The most common GBCA utilized by survey respondents were Eovist (60.7%), Ablavar (45.4%), Gadovist (38.7%), Magnevist (34.4%) and Dotarem (32.5%). For several clinical indications, survey responses regarding GBCA administration were concordant with American College of Radiology (ACR) Appropriateness Criteria, including seizures, headache and osteomyelitis. For other indications, including growth hormone deficiency and suspected vascular ring, survey responses revealed potential overutilization of GBCAs when compared to ACR recommendations. CONCLUSION: Survey results demonstrate that GBCAs are administered judiciously in children, yet there is an opportunity to improve their utilization with the goal of reducing potential future adverse effects.