Reason for Exam Imaging Reporting and Data System: Consensus Reached on Quality Assessment of Radiology Requisitions

Tofighi, Salar; Abedi, Aidin; Salehi, Sana; Myers, L.; Reddy, Sravanthi; Gholamrezanezhad, Ali

doi:10.1097/pts.0000000000000653

Cited by 13 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nevertheless, our results resonate with previous literature that generally reported poor imaging requests to be common [6][7][8][9][10][11][12]. They are also in line with the results of a recent survey in which the majority of radiologists (56.3 %) indicated that they encounter requisitions with incomplete or inaccurate data that make the interpretation challenging in more than half of the time [5]. Comprehensive studies on the determinants of poor quality imaging requests have also been lacking so far.…”

Section: Imaging Modalitysupporting

confidence: 91%

“…However, even for seemingly routine procedures, it is crucial that referring physicians provide an adequate impression, clinical information, and diagnostic question to the imaging request, because the lack of this information has been recognized as a source of diagnostic errors [13]. In a recent survey among radiologists (the majority from the United States) 12.6 % indicated to have experienced at least one lawsuit potentially preventable with sufficient information in the imaging request [5]. In addition, if a radiologist frequently has to look up the missing information in the medical records or by contacting the requesting physician, this will slow down workflow and it might be a source of stress and frustration that may even refrain the radiologist from doing so in a busy practice.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, is unclear if the results would be the same in centers with different volumes of examinations and with a non-academic profile. Third, RI-RADS was recently updated with the addition of a fifth category (RI-RADS grade X, which is assigned when no key category of information is included in the imaging request) [5]. Twenty-one of 134 RI-RADS grade D cases would have been reclassified as RI-RADS grade X if the updated RI-RADS was used.…”

Section: Imaging Modalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…RI-RADS scores allow for a systematic assessment of the quality of imaging requests. RI-RADS found broad support among a panel of 87 radiologists with diverse levels of experience from various settings [5]. It can be regarded as an improvement to non-standardized systems that were used in previous studies [6][7][8][9][10][11][12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Requests for radiologic imaging: Prevalence and determinants of inadequate quality according to RI-RADS

Kasalak

Alnahwi

Dierckx

et al. 2021

European Journal of Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To determine the prevalence and determinants of radiologic imaging requests that are of inadequate quality according to the Reason for exam Imaging Reporting and Data System (RI-RADS). Methods: This study included a random sample of 673 radiologic examinations performed at a tertiary care center. The quality of each imaging request was graded according to RI-RADS. Ordinal regression analysis was performed to determine the association of RI-RADS grade with patient age, gender, and hospital status, indication for imaging, requesting specialty, imaging modality, body region, time of examination, and relationship with previous imaging within the past one year. Results: RI-RADS grades A (adequate request), B (barely adequate request), C (considerably limited request), and D (deficient request) were assigned to 159 (23.6 %), 166 (24.7 %), 214 (31.8 %), and 134 (19.9 %) of cases, respectively. Indication for imaging, requesting specialty, and body region were independently significantly associated with RI-RADS grades. Specifically, routine preoperative imaging (odds ratio [OR]: 3.422, P = 0.030) and transplantation imaging requests (OR: 8.710, P = 0.000) had a higher risk of poorer RI-RADS grades, whereas infection/inflammation as indication for imaging (OR: 0.411, P = 0.002), pediatrics as requesting specialty (OR: 0.400, P = 0.007), and head (OR: 0.384, P = 0.017), spine (OR: 0.346, P = 0.016), and upper extremity (OR: 0.208, P = 0.000) as body regions had a lower risk of poorer RI-RADS grades. Conclusion:The quality of radiologic imaging requests is inadequate in >75 % of cases, and is affected by several factors. The data from this study can be used as a baseline and benchmark for further investigation and improvement.

show abstract

Section: Imaging Modalitysupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Imaging Modalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Requests for radiologic imaging: Prevalence and determinants of inadequate quality according to RI-RADS

Kasalak

Alnahwi

Dierckx

et al. 2021

European Journal of Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Structured reporting systems simplify the interpretation and reporting of imaging examinations, serve as a framework for consistent generation of recommendations, and improve the quality of patient care [12][13][14][15][16]. Our systematic review of the CT manifestations of COVID-19 showed a substantial inconsistency in description of imaging findings across the growing number of published studies [17].…”

Section: Role Of Chest Ct and Its Relationship With Rt-pcrmentioning

confidence: 93%

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) imaging reporting and data system (COVID-RADS) and common lexicon: a proposal based on the imaging data of 37 studies

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background In the vast majority of the laboratory-confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, computed tomography (CT) examinations yield a typical pattern and the sensitivity of this modality has been reported to be 97% in a large-scale study. Structured reporting systems simplify the interpretation and reporting of imaging examinations, serve as a framework for consistent generation of recommendations, and improve the quality of patient care. Purpose To compose a comprehensive lexicon for description of the imaging findings and propose a grading system and structured reporting format for CT findings in COVID-19. Material and methods We updated our published systematic review on imaging findings in COVID-19 to include 37 published studies pertaining to diagnostic features of COVID-19 in chest CT. Using the reported imaging findings of 3647 patients, we summarized the typical chest CT findings, atypical features, and temporal changes of COVID-19 in chest CT. Subsequently, we extracted a list of descriptive terms and mapped it to the terminology that is commonly used in imaging literature. ResultsWe composed a comprehensive lexicon that can be used for documentation and reporting of typical and atypical CT imaging findings in COVID-19 patients. Using the same data, we propose a grading system with five COVID-RADS categories. Each COVID-RADS grade corresponds to a low, moderate, or high level of suspicion for pulmonary involvement of COVID-19. Conclusion The proposed COVID-RADS and common lexicon would improve the communication of findings to other healthcare providers, thus facilitating the diagnosis and management of COVID-19 patients. Key Points• Chest CT has high sensitivity in diagnosing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).• Structured reporting systems simplify the interpretation and reporting of imaging examinations, serve as a framework for consistent generation of recommendations, and improve the quality of patient care. • The proposed COVID-RADS and common lexicon would improve the communication of findings to other healthcare providers, thus facilitating the diagnosis and management of COVID-19 patients.

show abstract

Imaging Findings of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Pediatrics: A Systematic Review of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in 850 Patients

Katal

Johnston

Johnston³

et al. 2020

Academic Radiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rationale and objectives Children with COVID-19 seem to have a relatively milder disease and better prognosis; however, severe disease or death could still occur in this age group. Although the knowledge on the clinical and epidemiology of COVID‐19 in pediatric patients is being accumulated rapidly, relevant comprehensive review on its radiological manifestations is still lacking. The present article reviews the radiological characteristics of COVID‐19 in pediatrics, based on the previous studies. Materials and methods We conducted a systematic literature search for published articles by using Medline, Scopus, Google Scholar and Embase online databases. All studies describing CT findings of COVID-19 in pediatrics (<18years) were included. Results A total of 39 studies with 850 pediatric patients were reviewed. 225 (26.5%) of patients had normal CT findings. Ground-glass opacities and consolidations were the most common CT abnormalities (384/625, 61.5%). Other findings were halo sign, interstitial opacities, bronchial wall thickening, and crazy-paving sign. Approximately 55% of patients had unilateral pulmonary findings. Most studies found peripheral and lower-lobe distribution to be a prominent imaging finding. Conclusion Our study showed that imaging findings in children were often milder and more focal than adults, typically as ground-glass opacities and consolidations with unilateral lower-lobe predominance, which have been regressed during the recovery time. A balance must be struck between the risk of radiation and the need for chest CT. If still necessary, low-dose CT is more appropriate in this age group. Albeit, due to the limited number of reported pediatrics with COVID-19, and the lack of consistency in CT descriptors, further work is still needed in this regard.

show abstract

Reason for Exam Imaging Reporting and Data System: Consensus Reached on Quality Assessment of Radiology Requisitions

Cited by 13 publications

References 20 publications

Requests for radiologic imaging: Prevalence and determinants of inadequate quality according to RI-RADS

Requests for radiologic imaging: Prevalence and determinants of inadequate quality according to RI-RADS

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) imaging reporting and data system (COVID-RADS) and common lexicon: a proposal based on the imaging data of 37 studies

Imaging Findings of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Pediatrics: A Systematic Review of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in 850 Patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About