Patient and Provider Feedback for Radiology Reports: Implementation of a Quality Improvement Project in a Multi-Institutional Setting

Bavadian, Niusha; Tan, Nelly; Pesch, Arthur J; McMullen, Kaley; Haman, Mike; Chan, Francis; Volk, Michael L.; Jacobson, Paul H.; Krishnaraj, Arun

doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2021.06.006

Cited by 7 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Twelve papers (described in Table 1 ) reporting 13 studies were included in this review. 26 , 29 One paper by Hong et al 30 reported three studies within one paper; two of these studies fulfilled the selection criteria and were included. Six studies reported qualitative findings, 24 , 30 , 31 , 34 , 35 two were ;quantitative.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 24 , 30 These articles explore patients’ experiences of imaging reports in several settings detailed in Table 1 . Two studies 26 , 29 incorporated provider/clinician perspectives in their study design, which will be separated out for this study.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three studies presented patient-reported experience of the timing of imaging reports. 26,28,33 These studies showed that many participants were happy with the timing of reports. Conversely, some participants sought out results before they were released to them.…”

Section: Quantitative Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…28,33 Five studies reported both qualitative and quantitative findings. [25][26][27]29,32 Ten studies were conducted in the United States, [26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35] one in Denmark 25 and a further two studies were conducted by US researchers online in English-speaking forums. 24,30 These articles explore patients' experiences of imaging reports in several settings detailed in Table 1.…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several studies have explored aspects of how patients experience imaging reports, however, to date, no attempt to synthesise the literature around this topic has been made. [24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35] To better understand how patients experience imaging reports, a systematic review of the literature was undertaken. The objectives of this review were to 1.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Patient experience of imaging reports: A systematic literature review

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Written reports are often the sole form of communication from diagnostic imaging. Reports are increasingly being accessed by patients through electronic records. Experiencing medical terminology can be confusing and lead to miscommunication, a decrease in involvement and increased anxiety for patients. Methods: This systematic review was designed to include predefined study selection criteria and was registered prospectively on PROSPERO (CRD42020221734). MEDLINE, CINAHL, Academic Search Complete (EBSCOhost), EMBASE, Scopus and EThOS were searched to identify articles meeting the inclusion criteria. Studies were assessed against the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool version 2018 for quality. A segregated approach was used to synthesise data. A thematic synthesis of the qualitative data and a narrative review of the quantitative data were performed, and findings of both syntheses were then integrated. Findings: Twelve articles reporting 13 studies were included. This review found that patients’ experiences of imaging reports included positive and negative aspects. The study identified two main themes encompassing both qualitative and quantitative findings. Patients reported their experiences regarding their understanding of reports and self-management. Discussion: Patient understanding of imaging reports is multi factorial including medical terminology, communication aids and errors. Self-management through direct access is important to patients. While receiving bad news is a concern, responsibility for accessing this is accepted. Conclusion: A patient-centred approach to writing imaging reports may help to improve the quality of service, patient experience and wider health outcomes.

show abstract