Radiology report format preferred by requesting physicians: prospective analysis in a population of physicians at a university hospital / Qual formato de laudo radiológico é preferido pelos médicos solicitantes: análise prospectiva em uma população médica de um hospital universitário

Abstract Objective: To improve communication between attending physicians and radiologists by defining which information should be included in radiology reports and which reporting format is preferred by requesting physicians at a university hospital. Materials and Methods: Respondents were asked to choose among reports with different formats and levels of detail, related to three hypothetical cases, and questioned as to which characteristics commonly found in radiology reports are appropriate for inclusion. To assign the absolute order of preference of the different reports, the Kemeny-Young method was used. Results: Ninety-nine physicians completed the questionnaires (40.4% were resident physicians; 31.3% were preceptors of residency programs; and 28.3% were professors of medicine). For ultrasound with normal findings, ultrasound showing alterations, and computed tomography, respectively, 54%, 59%, and 53% of the respondents chose structured reports with an impression or comment. According to the respondents, the characteristics that should be included in the radiology report are the quality of the image, details of the clinical presentation, diagnostic impression, examination technique, and information about contrast administration, selected by 92%, 91%, 89%, 72%, and 68%, respectively. Other characteristics that were considered important were recommendations on follow-up and additional radiological or non-radiological investigation. Conclusion: Requesting physicians apparently prefer structured reports with a radiologist impression or comment. Information such as the quality of the examination, the contrast agent used, and suggestions regarding follow-up and additional investigation are valued.

Resumo Objetivo: Melhorar a comunicação entre médicos assistentes e radiologistas, definindo quais informações deveriam ser incluídas num relatório radiológico e qual o formato preferido dos solicitantes de um hospital universitário. Materiais e Métodos: Os participantes foram convidados a escolher a opção preferida entre relatórios com diferentes formatos e níveis de detalhamento de três casos hipotéticos e questionados se características comumente encontradas em um laudo radiológico são apropriadas ou não para inclusão. Para atribuição da ordem absoluta de preferência dos diferentes relatórios, o método Kemeny-Young foi utilizado. Resultados: Noventa e nove médicos responderam os questionários (40,4% médicos residentes, 31,3% preceptores dos programas de residência e 28,3% professores da faculdade de medicina). Laudos estruturados com impressão ou comentário foram selecionados nas situações de ultrassonografia normal por 54% dos participantes, ultrassonografia alterada por 59% e tomografia computadorizada por 53%. As informações que deveriam ser incluídas, de acordo com os solicitantes, foram qualidade da imagem (92%), detalhes do cenário clínico (91%), impressão diagnóstica (89%), técnica do exame (72%), informações sobre meio de contraste (68%). Opiniões sobre seguimento e investigação radiológica ou não radiológica se mostraram importantes. Conclusão: Relatórios estruturados com impressão ou comentário de um radiologista são prepostos. Informações como qualidade de exame, meio de contraste utilizado e sugestões de acompanhamento e investigação adicional são valorizadas pelos médicos solicitantes.

[An approach to research in the political agendas of the health sector in Colombia between 1990 and 2010]. / Una aproximación a la investigación en las agendas políticas del sector salud en Colombia entre 1990 y 2010.

OBJECTIVE: To understand health research in Colombia in the context of governmental and legislative agendas related to the health sector between 1990 and 2010. METHODS: Official sources were used such as development plans, bills and institutional documents. RESULTS: The National Government, the Ministry of Health and Social Protection (MSPS by its acronym in Spanish) and the Colombian Congress have focused their attention on health research as a public concern at certain presidential periods due to their interest in reducing the gap between research and health needs. In the 1990s, government plans showed greater interest in formulating a Science and Technology (S&T) policy in health led by the Ministry, an entity that had directorates, commissions and committees responsible for promoting and planning health research. In Congress, some health system reform projects included initiatives to formulate a health research policy that were not approved. DISCUSSION: Health research is recognized as a fundamental tool to help solve health problems. However, said recognition by governmental and legislative actors has not been constant and the institutionality in the health sector has been precarious considering that there is no permanent interest in formulating an S&T policy in health.

OBJETIVO: Entender la investigación en salud en Colombia como parte de agendas gubernamentales y legislativas relacionadas con el sector salud entre 1990 y 2010. MÉTODOS: Se usaron fuentes documentales oficiales como planes de desarrollo, proyectos de ley y otras publicaciones institucionales. RESULTADOS: El Gobierno Nacional, el Ministerio de Salud y Protección Social (MSPS) y el Congreso colombiano han puesto la atención a la investigación en salud como un problema público en diferentes periodos presidenciales debido al interés de reducir la brecha entre la investigación y las necesidades en salud. En los planes gubernamentales durante los años noventa se presentó mayor interés en la formulación de una política de Ciencia y Tecnología (CyT) en salud liderado por el MSPS, entidad que contaba con direcciones, comisiones y comités encargados de promover y planear la investigación en salud. En el Congreso, algunos proyectos de reforma al sistema de salud incluyeron iniciativas para formular una política de investigación en salud que no fueron aprobadas. DISCUSIÓN: La investigación en salud es reconocida como fundamental para contribuir a solucionar los problemas de salud. Sin embargo, este reconocimiento no ha sido constante por parte de los actores gubernamentales y legislativos, la institucionalidad en el sector salud ha sido precaria y no hubo insistente interés por formular una política de CyT en salud.