Radiologist Use of and Perceived Need for Patient Data Access

Abstract

Given the increasing volume of radiological exams, the decreasing frequency of direct communication with the referring provider, and the distribution of patient data over many clinical systems, radiologists often do not have adequate clinical information at the time of interpretation. We have performed a survey of radiologists to determine the need and actual utilization of patient data at the time of image interpretation. Our findings demonstrate that most radiologists want more clinical information when interpreting images and that this information would impact their report, but they are discouraged by the time it takes to access this information. In addition, current mechanisms for monitoring necessary patient follow-up are inadequate.

Evaluating the Referring Physician’s Clinical History and Indication as a Means for Communicating Chronic Conditions That Are Pertinent at the Point of Radiologic Interpretation

“…The referenced study reports positive short-term effects on the information content of the CHI, but also observed that in a 3-month window, the "rates decayed back toward baseline." Several studies also showed positive impact of CPOE on the quality of clinical indications as compared to paper-based orders [12][13][14][15]. Technological innovation that automatically synthesizes patient background information and presents it to the radiologist in an intuitive manner is yet another route for resolving the clinical information communication gap between referring clinicians and radiologists laid bare by our study [16].…”

“…In yet another study, less than 7 % of the clinical order indications were marked as reasonable or excellent [13]. A survey of radiologists showed that the majority (72 %) felt in need of more clinical information about their patients, and 87 % stated that additional information would have significant impact on interpretation [14].…”

Radiology IT: Applications Integration vs. Consolidation

“…However, researchers involved in such work are cautioned that the problems with the present Radiology IT architecture run far deeper than can possibly be outlined in a single paper. To mention a few of these issues, environments with multiple RIS and PACS [16] installations add complexity, radiologists demand more extensive and relevant information about patients during interpretation [17], and sharing PACS among disparate institutions [18].…”

A two-cycle prospective audit of temporal bone computed tomography scan requests: improving the clinical applicability of radiology reports

“…2 Contrary to this, a recent systematic review showed that the provision of clinical information improved the diagnostic accuracy of reports without introducing bias. 3 Other studies have demonstrated that the provision of inadequate clinical information is more likely to result in an inaccurate report, whereas detailed clinical information increases the likelihood of the report being clinically relevant. 4 These effects are likely to be more significant for complex imaging studies such as temporal bone CT, where previous surgery can mimic disease processes and vice versa (e.g.…”