Estimating the productivity of radiologists in Brazil: the search for a benchmark

Bretas, Elisa Almeida Sathler; Guimarães, Ruy Moraes Machado; Aihara, André Yui; Filho, Hilton Muniz Leão; Chojniak, Rubens; Muglia, Valdair Francisco; D'Ippólito, Giuseppe

doi:10.1590/0100-3984.2019.0081

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, it is unclear whether the results of our study are also applicable to institutions in which the remuneration of medical specialists is, in part, dependent on production numbers. 16,20,21 Second, most second opinion reports concerned oncologic patients. It is unclear whether the results of this study are generalizable to institutions that provide health care services to a different spectrum of patients undergoing NHN imaging.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recommendations in Second Opinion Reports of Neurologic Head and Neck Imaging: Frequency, Referring Clinicians’ Compliance, and Diagnostic Yield

Heinz

Yakar

Dierckx

et al. 2021

AJNR Am J Neuroradiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Second opinion reports of neurologic head and neck imaging are requested with increased regularity, and they may contain a recommendation to the clinician. Our aim was to investigate the frequency and determinants of the presence of a recommendation and the adherence by the referring physician to the recommendation in a second opinion neurology head and neck imaging report and the diagnostic yield of these recommendations. MATERIALS AND METHODS:This retrospective study included 994 consecutive second opinion reports of neurology head and neck imaging examinations performed at a tertiary care center. RESULTS:Of the 994 second opinion reports, 12.2% (121/994) contained a recommendation. An oncologic imaging indication was significantly (P ¼ .030) associated with a lower chance of a recommendation in the second opinion report (OR ¼ .67; 95% CI, 0.46-0.96). Clinicians followed 65.7% (88/134) of the recommendations. None of the investigated variables (patient age, sex, hospitalization status, indication for the second opinion report, experience of the radiologist who signed the second opinion report, strength of the recommendation, and whether the recommendation was made due to apparent quality issues of the original examination) were significantly associated with the compliance of the referring physician to this recommendation. The 134 individual recommendations eventually led to the establishment of 52 (38.2%) benign diagnoses and 28 (20.6%) malignant diagnoses, while no definitive diagnosis could be established in 56 (41.2%) cases. CONCLUSIONS:Recommendations are relatively common in second opinion reports of neurology head and neck imaging examinations, though less for oncologic indications. They are mostly followed by requesting physicians, thus affecting patient management. In most cases, they also lead to the establishment of a diagnosis, hence adding value to patient care.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recommendations in Second Opinion Reports of Neurologic Head and Neck Imaging: Frequency, Referring Clinicians’ Compliance, and Diagnostic Yield

Heinz

Yakar

Dierckx

et al. 2021

AJNR Am J Neuroradiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, there were no financial incentives for radiologists to add a recommendation to the second opinion report or for referring physicians to follow a recommendation. However, it is unclear whether the results of our study are also applicable to institutions in which the remuneration of medical specialists is, in part, dependent on production numbers [16,20,21] Second, most second opinion reports concerned oncologic patients. It is unclear whether the results of this study are generalizable to institutions that provide health care services to a different spectrum of patients undergoing NHN imaging.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Second Opinion Radiology Consultations and Recommendations to Clinicians

Heinz¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo investigate the frequency, determinants, clinical implications, and costs of recommendations for additional imaging (RAIs) in secondary interpretations of abdominal imaging examinations.Methods This retrospective study included 2225 abdominal imaging examinations from outside institutions that were reinterpreted as part of standard clinical care at a tertiary care center in a one-year time frame.Results Two hundred forty-six RAIs were present in 231 of 2225 reports (10.4%) of secondary abdominal imaging interpretations. Patient age and experience of the radiologist who performed the secondary interpretation were independently significantly associated with the presence of an RAI (both p = 0.002), with odds ratios of 0.99 per year increase in patient age (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98-1.00) and 1.06 per year increase in experience of the radiologist (95% CI, 1.02-1.10). If followed, RAIs changed clinical management in 31.2%. Total costs of all 246 RAIs, whether performed or not by the referring physicians, amounted to C71,032.21, thus resulting in C31.92 per secondary abdominal imaging interpretation. Total costs of the 140 RAIs that were actually performed by the referring physicians amounted to C42,683.08, resulting in C19.18 per secondary abdominal imaging interpretation.Conclusions The frequency of RAIs in reports of secondary interpretations of abdominal imaging examinations (which appear to be affected by patients' age and radiologists' experience) and associated costs are non-negligible. However, RAIs not infrequently change clinical management. The presented data may be helpful to radiology departments and healthcare policy makers to make well-informed decisions on the value and facilitation of the practice of secondary interpretations.

show abstract

Bosniak classification of cystic renal masses version 2019 does not increase the interobserver agreement or the proportion of masses categorized into lower Bosniak classes for non-subspecialized readers on CT or MR

Pacheco

Torres

Alves

et al. 2020

European Journal of Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Estimating the productivity of radiologists in Brazil: the search for a benchmark

Cited by 3 publications

References 18 publications

Recommendations in Second Opinion Reports of Neurologic Head and Neck Imaging: Frequency, Referring Clinicians’ Compliance, and Diagnostic Yield

Recommendations in Second Opinion Reports of Neurologic Head and Neck Imaging: Frequency, Referring Clinicians’ Compliance, and Diagnostic Yield

Second Opinion Radiology Consultations and Recommendations to Clinicians

Bosniak classification of cystic renal masses version 2019 does not increase the interobserver agreement or the proportion of masses categorized into lower Bosniak classes for non-subspecialized readers on CT or MR

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About