Part I: preparing first-year radiology residents and assessing their readiness for on-call responsibilities

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study is to evaluate the effectiveness of an Emergency Radiology (ER) Core Curriculum training module and a Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM)-based interactive examination system to prepare first-year (postgraduate year 2 [PGY-2]) radiology residents and assess their readiness for taking overnight radiology call. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval was obtained, and the study was compliant with Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) regulations. A dedicated month-long ER curriculum was designed to prepare new radiology residents for overnight radiology call that includes interpretation of off-hour urgent and emergent studies without immediate direct attending supervision. Lectures of the curriculum, provided by department staff, were based on the American Society of Emergency Radiology core curriculum. The lecture series was implemented after PGY-2 residents had completed formal introductory resident rotations during their first 6 months of training. A DICOM-based interactive computer-based testing module was developed and administered at the end of the lecture series. The module consisted of 19 actual emergency department cases with entire series of images, simulating an on-call setting. Tests were scored by two staff members blinded to resident identifying information. Upper-level residents also were tested, and comparison was made between first-year and upper-level resident test scores to determine the effectiveness of the test in determining first-year resident preparedness for call. Statistical analysis of results was performed by using t-test (P < .05). RESULTS: All residents in the residency program present during the month (nine PGY-2, six PGY-3, seven PGY-4, seven PGY-5 residents) attended the lecture series and finished the testing module at the end of the lecture series. Of 19 actual emergency cases on the testing module, five cases were neuroradiology, three cases were thoracic imaging, eight cases were body imaging, and three cases were musculoskeletal. PGY-2 residents scored an average of 73.0% (range, 63.2%-81.6%) of total points possible. PGY-3 residents scored an average of 76.8% (range, 68.4%-86.8%); PGY-4 residents scored an average of 77.4% (range, 65.8%-100%), and PGY-5 residents scored an average of 81.2% (range, 68.4%-94.7%). There was no statistically significant difference in scores according to level of training. CONCLUSION: First-year radiology residents who underwent 6 months of formal radiology training followed by an intensive ER lecture series before taking overnight call had scores similar to upper-level colleagues on an interactive computer-based ER simulation module.     

Building a leadership team that works

Radiology administrators often are challenged to do more with less. In today's fast-paced work environment, leaders must be creative. They must surround themselves with good people in order to successfully achieve their organizations' goals. Once a radiology administrator is satisfied and comfortable that he or she has, the right staff involved, a leadership team can be formally establislished. Howard Regional Health System established an Imaging Services Leadership Team with a vision to provide leaders for the staff to "follow," just as team members learn from the radiology administrator. In addition, team members are vital in assisting the radiology administrator in managing the department The process of building the team consisted of 3 steps: selecting team members (the most challenging and time-consuming component), formalizing a functional team, and putting the team into action. Finding the right people, holding regular meetings, and making those team meetings meaningful are keys to a successful leadership team. The implementation of the team has had a positive effect on imaging services: the number of procedures has increased, the team is used as a communication tool for front-line staff, front-line staff are becoming more comfortable with making decisions.     

Radiologist Point-of-Care Clinical Decision Support and Adherence to Guidelines for Incidental Lung Nodules

PurposeTo evaluate the effect of a workstation-integrated, point-of-care, clinical decision support (CDS) tool on radiologist adherence to radiology department guidelines for follow-up of incidental pulmonary nodules detected on abdominal CT.MethodsThe CDS tool was developed to facilitate adherence to department guidelines for managing pulmonary nodules seen on abdominal CT. In October 2012, the tool was deployed within the radiology department of an academic medical center and could be used for a given abdominal CT at the discretion of the interpreting radiologist. We retrospectively identified consecutive patients who underwent abdominal CT (in the period from January 2012 to April 2013), had no comparison CT scans available, and were reported to have a solid, noncalcified, pulmonary nodule. Concordance between radiologist follow-up recommendation and department guidelines was compared among three groups: patients scanned before implementation of the CDS tool; and patients scanned after implementation, with versus without use of the tool.ResultsA total of 409 patients were identified, including 268 for the control group. Overall, guideline concordance was higher after CDS tool implementation (92 of 141 [65%] versus 133 of 268 [50%], P = .003). This finding was driven by the subset of post-CDS implementation cases in which the CDS tool was used (57 of 141 [40%]). In these cases, guideline concordance was significantly higher (54 of 57 [95%]), compared with post-implementation cases in which CDS was not used (38 of 84 [45%], P < .001), and to a control group of patients from before implementation (133 of 268 [50%]; P < .001).ConclusionsA point-of-care CDS tool was associated with improved adherence to guidelines for follow-up of incidental pulmonary nodules.     

Clinical consequences of misinterpretations of neuroradiologic CT scans by on-call radiology residents

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Studies have looked at the accuracy of radiologic interpretations by radiology residents as compared with staff radiologists with regard to emergency room plain films, emergency room body CT scans, and trauma head CT scans; however, to our knowledge, no study has evaluated on-call resident interpretations of all types of neuroradiologic CT scans. Both as a part of our departmental quality control program and to address concerns of clinical services about misinterpretation of neuroradiologic CT scans by on-call radiology residents, we evaluated the frequency of incorrect preliminary interpretations of neuroradiologic CT scans by on-call radiology residents and the effect of such misinterpretations on clinical management and patient outcome. METHODS: As determined by the staff neuroradiologist the next day, all potentially clinically significant changes to preliminary reports of emergency neuroradiologic CT scans rendered by on-call radiology residents were recorded over a 9-month period. A panel of neuroradiologists reviewed and graded all the changed cases by consensus. An emergency department staff physician reviewed medical records of all submitted cases to determine clinical consequences of the misinterpretations. RESULTS: Significant misinterpretations were made in 21 (0.9%) of 2388 cases during the study period. There was a significant change in patient management in 12 of the cases, with a potentially serious change in patient outcome in two cases (0.08%). CONCLUSION: On-call radiology residents have a low rate of significant misinterpretations of neuroradiologic CT scans, and the potential to affect patient outcome is rare.     

The Case-Based Radiology Teaching Conference for Residents: Beneficial Effect of Previewing Cases and Using Answer Sheets

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Radiology residents often experience the case-based teaching conference as an inquisition, during which the moderator painfully extracts observations, conclusions, and facts from a discussant while other attendees passively observe. This experience is frequently disliked by all participants. The author hypothesized that such conferences could be improved by previewing cases and using answer sheets. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A bimonthly, 1-hour, case-based skeletal radiology teaching conference was modified so that residents previewed 20 single-image cases for 45 seconds each while completing answer sheets. Directed by a moderator, residents then took turns discussing their responses. Attendees completed evaluation forms. RESULTS: Five conferences were evaluated, and a total of 81 evaluation forms were received. The average response rate per conference was 90%. The evaluations indicated that the content was appropriate (96% [78 of 81 evaluations]), the format helped learning (98% [79 of 81]), the new format was preferred to the traditional format (98% [78 of 80]), and more such conferences were desired (99% [80 of 81]). Evaluations also suggested that the requirement to commit to a diagnosis was beneficial, greater participation and engagement were obtained from all attendees, and more cases were discussed. CONCLUSION: Modifying case-based radiology teaching conferences by having participants preview cases and use answer sheets has positive educational benefits and is well received.     

Emotional support for patients with cancer who are undergoing CT: semistructured interviews of patients at a cancer institute.

To understand and improve the experience of cancer patients undergoing computed tomography (CT), 79 patients who underwent CT at a cancer institute participated in semistructured interviews about their experiences with CT. All patients had previously undergone CT; 75% (n = 59), three times or more. Anxiety about results was the most common concern during first and subsequent CT examinations. Technical aspects were a common concern during initial scanning, but not subsequently. Methods of relaxation most used by patients during CT were following instructions (56% [n = 44]), meditating and visualizing (44% [n = 35]), and praying (42% [n = 33]). Patients suggested several ways in which the radiology staff can support them during the evaluation of their malignancy. Fifty-five (70%) of the patients said they would like the radiologist to tell them the results of their scanning. Optimal care of patients with cancer who undergo CT goes beyond technical to emotional and spiritual support.     

Do computers teach better? A media comparison study for case-based teaching in radiology.

A prospective study was performed to better define the role of computers in teaching radiology to medical students. Two hundred twenty-five 3rd-year students were randomly assigned to one of four groups and exposed to 10 radiology cases as well as to a voluntary weekly radiology lecture. Group A used computer-based cases with interactive elements; group B used computer-based cases without interactive elements; group C used paper-based cases with interactive elements; and group D was not exposed to the cases and served as a control group. On a multiple-choice question test, groups A, B, and C showed significant improvement (+11.2%, +15.1%, and +13.0%, respectively), whereas group D did not (+0.6%). On an image interpretation test, group A showed the most improvement (+15.7% [P <.001]), followed by group B (+15.1% [P <.01]) and group C (+10.2% [P <.05]); group D showed no significant improvement (+8.5%). No significant differences in the learning outcome were found between the two interactive groups (computer based and paper based). Computer-based teaching with case studies (with or without interactivity) improves students' problem-solving ability in radiology.     

Discordance rates between preliminary and final radiology reports on cross-sectional imaging studies at a level 1 trauma center

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The goal was to determine discordance rates between preliminary radiology reports provided by on-call radiology house staff and final reports from attending radiologists on cross-sectional imaging studies requested by emergency department staff after hours. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A triplicate carbon copy reporting form was developed to provide permanent records of preliminary radiology reports and to facilitate communication of discrepant results to the emergency department. Data were collected over 21 weeks to determine the number of discordant readings. Patients' medical records were reviewed to show whether discrepancies were significant or insignificant and to assess their impact on subsequent management and patient outcome. RESULTS: The emergency department requested 2830 cross-sectional imaging studies after hours and 2311 (82%) had a copy of the triplicate form stored in radiology archives. Discrepancies between the preliminary and final report were recorded in 47 (2.0%), with 37 (1.6%) considered significant: 14 patients needed no change, 13 needed a minor change, and 10 needed a major change in subsequent management. Ten (0.43%) of the discordant scans were considered insignificant. A random sample of 104 (20%) of the 519 scans without a paper triplicate form was examined. Seventy-one (68%) did have a scanned copy of the triplicate form in the electronic record, with a discrepancy recorded in 3 (4.2%), which was not statistically different from the main cohort (P = .18). CONCLUSION: Our study suggests a high level of concordance between preliminary reports from on-call radiology house staff and final reports by attending subspecialty radiologists on cross-sectional imaging studies requested by the emergency department.     

A survey of MRI quality assurance programmes

There are currently no national guidelines on appropriate quality assurance (QA) test frequencies for MRI equipment in clinical use. From a random selection of 45 hospitals in England, who were contacted by phone, 35 hospitals agreed to participate in a survey of MRI QA and were sent a questionnaire requesting information on the range and frequency of QA tests, as well as the staff groups who conduct these tests. Twenty-four completed replies were received, representing a 68% response rate from the distributed questionnaires. Of these, 79% undertook some form of QA, typically conducted by the radiographic staff. Tests were most often undertaken on the head coil, but there was a considerable variation in the frequency and range of tests undertaken at different hospitals. For example, exactly half of the respondents conducted signal to noise ratio (SNR) tests on both head and body coils, but only 13% of centres extended this test to other coils. Results from this survey should inform radiology departments regarding practice at other hospitals and should assist in formulating the frequency and scope of appropriate MRI QA programmes.     

Radiologist Quality Assurance by Nonradiologists at Tumor Board

PurposeTo explore the use of nonradiologists as a method to efficiently reduce bias in the assessment of radiologist performance using a hepatobiliary tumor board as a case study.Materials and MethodsInstitutional review board approval was obtained for this HIPAA-compliant prospective quality assurance (QA) effort. Consecutive patients with CT or MR imaging reviewed at one hepatobiliary tumor board between February 2016 and October 2016 (n = 265) were included. All presentations were assigned prospective anonymous QA scores by an experienced nonradiologist hepatobiliary provider based on contemporaneous comparison of the imaging interpretation at a tumor board and the original interpretation(s): concordant, minor discordance, major discordance. Major discordance was defined as a discrepancy that may affect clinical management. Minor discordance was defined as a discrepancy unlikely to affect clinical management. All discordances and predicted management changes were retrospectively confirmed by the liver tumor program medical director. Logistic regression analyses were performed to determine what factors best predict discordant reporting.ResultsApproximately one-third (30% [79 of 265]) of reports were assigned a discordance, including 51 (19%) minor and 28 (11%) major discordances. The most common related to mass size (41% [32 of 79]), tumor stage and extent (24% [19 of 79]), and assigned LI-RADS v2014 score (22% [17 of 79]). One radiologist had 11.8-fold greater odds of discordance (P = .002). Nine other radiologists were similar (P = .10-.99). Radiologists presenting their own studies had 4.5-fold less odds of discordance (P = .006).ConclusionsQA conducted in line with tumor board workflow can enable efficient assessment of radiologist performance. Discordant interpretations are commonly (30%) reported by nonradiologist providers.     

Semiautomated fluoroscopy radiation dose capture and reporting

OBJECTIVE: This article describes a semiautomated system for the capture and reporting of fluoroscopic dose data in a large radiology department. By use of a novel Web-based interface, dose data are entered by technologists at the time of examination, and radiology reports are populated automatically. CONCLUSION: Dose data were successfully captured in 94% of 5,914 reports generated over the course of 6 months. Missing data were attributed to system malfunction (9.5%) and human error (90.5%) and could be reconstructed by quality control measurements in most instances.     

Small cell lung carcinoma: Eight types of extension and spread on computed tomography

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to classify the types of tumor extension and spread of small cell lung carcinoma (SCLC) and to recognize the unusual types of spread pattern of SCLC on computed tomography (CT) including multidetector row CT (MDCT) using contrast-enhanced material. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-eight cases (53 men and 15 women aged 54-83 years old) of pathologically proven SCLC were examined mainly by contrast-enhanced CT scan. In surgically treated 7 cases, CT-pathologic correlations were performed. RESULTS: Eight types of extension and spread were recognized by the examinations of chest CT. The type of central mass + mediastinal extension (n = 20 [29.4%]) was the most common manifestation. The types of central perihilar mass (n = 12 [17.6%]), peripheral mass + mediastinal extension (n = 14 [20.6%]), and peripheral mass (n = 7 [10.3%]) were frequently observed. The primary site of SCLC was in peripheral lung tissue in 21 of 68 cases (30.9%) in this study. Unusual CT manifestations, such as the types of lymphangitic spread (n = 6 [8.8%]), pleural dissemination (n = 4 [5.9%]), lobar replacement (n = 3 [4.4%]), pneumonialike air-space infiltrative spread (n = 2 [2.9%]) were recognized in our study. Stenosis of trachea and main bronchus caused by peribronchial extension were commonly noted. In the advanced cases with mediastinal extension, we observed the extension of SCLC to superior vena cava (n = 22), main pulmonary artery (n = 18), pulmonary vein (n = 11), and thoracic aortic wall (n = 7). Peri-and intracardial invasions were also observed in 9 cases. CONCLUSIONS: Computed tomography including MDCT analysis revealed 8 types of extension and spread of SCLC including unusual forms in 68 SCLC cases. Peribronchial extension and great vessel wall involvement, such as superior vena cava, main pulmonary artery, and peri-/intra-cardial extension, were commonly observed in advanced stage.     

Educational impact of faculty review on radiology residents' radiographic interpretations

The objective of this study was to analyze the improvements in film reading performance made by radiology residents during their first six months of training. Five first-year residents and eight radiologic technology students each interpreted two of three matched sets of 39 films under two conditions. One set's readings were reviewed by a staff radiologist, while the other's were unreviewed. Six months later, each observer read all three sets. After the first six months of training, residents improved their reporting of findings. There was less improvement in technologists' readings. Review and instruction by staff, both in the laboratory and daily work settings, appeared to contribute to improved performance. Accuracy of residents' final diagnosis did not improve significantly. We conclude that a training system in which residents' film interpretations are reviewed by staff can lead to improved resident performance. When studied in a longitudinal fashion, these improvements are detectable within six months. This teaching system is used in many radiology departments.     

Assessing radiology resident reporting skills

PURPOSE: To develop an Objective Structured Clinical Examination for assessing the reporting skills of radiology residents. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The approach used in this study derives from performance-based assessment, that is, tests in which actual performance of a skill is observed and measured. For this task, 29 radiology residents and five faculty members (n = 34) independently dictated reports regarding a set of 20 cases with radiographs in 1 hour. The task was performed in a controlled environment. Data were analyzed by using analysis of variance and tests for linear trends, with the expectation of increasing performance with increasing experience. RESULTS: Significant relationships were observed between subjects' experience and the mean number of cases completed (F = 4.46, P =.006), the mean number of well-specified impressions (F = 5.84, P =.001), and the mean number of urgent or discrepant findings noted (F = 3.67, P =.015). Results also demonstrated a clear linear trend of increasing performance with increasing experience with each variable (P =.002, <.001, and.002, respectively, for t tests with polynomial contrasts). CONCLUSION: The significant linear trends indicate that reporting skills increase with increasing experience in the program. This finding supports the validity of the measurement. The Objective Structured Clinical Examination provides a means of assessing radiology resident reporting skills.     

Detection of colorectal carcinoma on double contrast barium enema when double reporting is routinely performed: an audit of current practice

PURPOSE: To determine the sensitivity of double contrast barium enema (DCBE) in the detection of colorectal carcinoma (CRC) when double reporting is routinely performed. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Over a 1-year period all patients with a diagnosis of CRC within a large teaching hospital were identified. Using computer records, any patient with CRC who had had a DCBE within 5 years of diagnosis was identified. During this time period all DCBE were double reported by the radiographer or radiology trainee who performed the enema and by a consultant radiologist specializing in gastrointestinal radiology. RESULTS: Over the 1-year period 169 patients were identified with a diagnosis of CRC. Seventy patients had had a DCBE within the preceding 5 years. Sixty-four patients had had CRC diagnosed on the DCBE. One patient had a sessile polyp diagnosed, which was removed at colonoscopy and found to be an invasive adenocarcinoma. In five cases (7%) the CRC was not diagnosed on DCBE. In three cases the lesions could be seen retrospectively, in one case the lesion could not be seen and in one case the examination had been incomplete. CONCLUSION: In our series the miss-rate for CRC was 7%. Previous studies have shown miss-rates of 15-24%. These studies have not routinely employed double reporting. Our results suggest that double reporting of DCBE significantly reduces the miss-rate and that this reduction is due to fewer perceptive errors.     

Online radiology appropriateness survey: results and conclusions from an academic internal medicine residency

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: This study was performed to evaluate the ability of medical trainees to choose appropriate diagnostic imaging studies for patients with various clinical indications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve clinical scenarios were excerpted from the 2000 edition of the American College of Radiology appropriateness criteria and arranged in multiple-choice question format. Summary answers based on the criteria were written. The questionnaire and answer key were placed online and linked; the answer key was viewable only after all 12 answers were submitted by the trainee. An invitation to participate in the online survey was forwarded to medical house staff. RESULTS: Sixty-five (43.3%) of 150 potential respondents completed the survey. The results were tabulated for all respondents and separately for each postgraduate-year class. Fewer than 50% of the respondents correctly answered more than half of the 12 questions. The average number of questions answered correctly by 1st-year residents was 7.02; by 2nd-year residents, 7.5; and by 3rd-year residents, 7.9. CONCLUSION: Medical house staff are not adequately prepared to choose appropriate imaging examinations for specific indications. Improvements in education could prevent inappropriate use of radiology resources. Imaging centers might want to consider developing online catalogs to assist clinicians in choosing appropriate imaging tests.     

Use of productivity and financial indicators for monitoring performance in academic radiology departments: U.S. nationwide survey

PURPOSE: To determine how productivity- and finance-related indicators are used by radiology departments to evaluate departmental performance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study met the criteria to be exempt from institutional review board approval. All subjects were informed of the purpose of the study and that their questionnaire responses would be kept confidential. For the study, a survey was sent to 132 members of the Society of Chairmen of Academic Radiology Departments (SCARD) nationwide. The survey was designed to (a) assess organizational information about hospital and radiology departments, (b) determine the types and mean numbers of productivity and financial indicators used by radiology departments, (c) determine how these indicators are used to influence departmental productivity, and (d) assess the reference-standard goals with which each indicator value was compared. A total of 77 variables were studied. Summary statistics, Spearman rank correlation coefficient, and chi2 analyses were performed. RESULTS: The response rate was 42% (55 of 132 surveyed SCARD members). The mean number of productivity indicators used by radiology departments was 4.55 +/- 2.56 (standard deviation), while the mean number of financial indicators used was 2.89 +/- 1.99. Twenty-two (40%) of the 55 responding departments used productivity indicators to monitor and provide feedback to radiologists, hospital leaders, and technical staff members for improved productivity, but only 11 (20%) departments used these indicators to compare personnel performances against specific productivity standards. The most frequent goal (of seven [13%] responding departments) of using the indicators was to increase the examination volume from the previous year by 5%-10%. CONCLUSION: Academic radiology departments across the United States do not use a standardized set of productivity and financial indicators to measure departmental performance. Examination volume is the most frequently used productivity indicator, whereas general expenses are commonly used as indicators of financial status.     

Looking Back,Moving Forward: An Analysis of Complaints Submitted to a Canadian Tertiary Care Radiology Department and Lessons Learned

Purpose

We present an analysis of various types and strata of complaints received in a geographically isolated tertiary care center over a 2.5-year period.

Methods

Research ethics board approval was obtained. The institution described is a closed system with formalized procedures for submitting complaints. All complaints submitted between November 2010 and March 2013 were collected retrospectively. The following data were extracted: type of complainant, nature of the complaint, site or modality of concern, dates in question, and the response. The data were analysed in multiple subgroups and compared with patient and study volume data.

Results

The frequency of complaints equalled 0.01% (100/1,050,000). The largest group of those who submitted complaints were patients (69% [69/100]), followed by referring physicians (16%). Examination scheduling and interpersonal conflicts were equally of greatest frequency of concern (21% [21/100]), followed by issues with study reporting (16%). The average time interval between complaint submission and formal address was 15 days.

Conclusions

We present a low frequency of complaints, with the majority of these complaints submitted by patients; scheduling and personal interactions were most often involved. Effective communication, both with patients and referring physicians, was identified as a particular focus for improving satisfaction.     

Accident and emergency reporting in UK teaching departments

A survey of 44 UK training departments shows that trainee radiologists commence accident and emergency (A & E) reporting after an average of 10.2 months in radiology and perform a considerable proportion of the A & E reporting workload. Most respondents consider that they supervise junior staff but only 11 departments directly check their work and only two departments offer supervision to staff with more than 2 years' experience. All A & E radiographs are reported in 79.9% of hospitals and the other hospitals operate selective reporting policies. The delay between the radiographic examination and the radiology report reaching the A & E department is less than 48 hours in about two-thirds of departments when the examination is performed Monday to Friday, but exceeds 48 hours in two-thirds of departments when it is performed at weekends. Misinterpretation of radiographs is one of the commonest errors in A & E. Improved supervision of less experienced trainees is required. Consultants should contribute and one should be responsible for this area. Radiological conferences are important and the secretarial services require major improvement.