Survey of hospital clinicians' preferences regarding the format of radiology reports
Introduction
Written reports are the main form of information transfer from the radiology department to the referring clinician. However, there is a relative paucity of research concerning the style and content of reports preferred by clinicians. Furthermore, it is not clear how clinicians prefer this content to be presented. There have been several explorations of these issues in the literature; however, the majority come from North America.1, 2, 3 To the authors' knowledge, there are no published reports of UK clinician preferences for style, content, or format of radiology reports.
The advent of more sophisticated radiology information systems (RIS) with better integration with picture archiving and communication systems (PACS) has allowed the possibility of alternative formats to the traditional prose report. Tabular formats can be generated as a proforma within the RIS and, potentially, voice recognition could be used to provide the information within these tables.4 Although this approach may have benefits in terms of rapid generation of reports and bypass of the dictation step, it is unclear whether these alternative formats are appealing, or indeed acceptable, to clinicians.
Therefore, there is a gap in the UK literature regarding clinician preferences for radiology reports, with regard to both format and content. The aim of the present study was to explore this under-researched area.
Section snippets
Materials and methods
A questionnaire was sent to 99 consultants requesting radiology examinations from our trust (Appendix 1). The main body of the questionnaire was divided into three sections. The first asked how satisfied clinicians were with the radiology reports they receive on a 10-point scale and what they felt should be included in a report. Multiple yes/no options of commonly included features of reports were provided and the participants invited to decide whether they felt each item was appropriate for
Demographics
Of the 99 questionnaires sent, 49 replies were received (49% reply rate). A wide range of specialties were represented, including general medicine, general surgery, cardiology, chest medicine, gastroenterology, rheumatology, anaesthesia and intensive care, otorhinolaryngology, trauma and orthopaedics, urology and vascular surgery. The average number of reports read per week was estimated by them to be around 15.
Satisfaction rates
Satisfaction rates with the radiology reports were generally good, for both clarity
Discussion
It is unclear at present how much information regarding a radiological investigation is appreciated by clinicians, and in what format this should be presented. Detailed reports potentially serve to communicate the maximum information to the clinician to aid in patient care, serve as a medicolegal record, and aid in retrospective interpretation of images or in multidisciplinary team meetings. However, superfluous information can detract from the main message of a radiological report and
References (12)
- et al.
Radiology reporting—where does the radiologist's duty end?
Lancet
(2006) - et al.
A framework for improving radiology reporting
J Am Coll Radiol
(2005) - et al.
Structured reporting: coronary CT angiography: a white paper from the American College of Radiology and the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging
J Am Coll Radiol
(2008) - et al.
The radiological report: what is useful for the referring physician?
Can Assoc Radiol J
(1988) - et al.
Radiology reports: how much descriptive detail is enough?
AJR Am J Roentgenol
(1995) - et al.
Radiology reports: examining radiologist and clinician preferences regarding style and content
AJR Am J Roentgenol
(2001)
Cited by (94)
What information is required in a preliminary clinical evaluation? A service evaluation
2021, RadiographyCitation Excerpt :This preferred style implies that the PCE should be a short comment, without excessive wording, and is supported by a recent study which suggested a similar style.11 Bulleted or listed findings will likely provide clearer conveyance of the radiographer's interpretation, and provide a more consistent structure which is both helpful to the clinicians16,18 and the radiographer. The format and writing of a PCE has been considered a potential barrier to radiographers being confident in undertaking such a role,5,11,12 so the use of a structured tool to educate radiographers to produce a PCE may help facilitate overcoming this.
Discrepant Reporting Style Preferences Between Clinicians and Radiologists
2021, Current Problems in Diagnostic RadiologyUltrasound reports standardisation using rhetorical structure theory and domain ontology
2019, Journal of Biomedical Informatics: XStructured Reporting of CT Angiography Runoff Examinations of the Lower Extremities
2018, European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular SurgeryStructured Reporting of IR Procedures: Effect on Report Compliance, Accuracy, and Satisfaction
2018, Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology