Structured reporting of head and neck ultrasound examinations

Ernst, Benjamin Philipp; Hodeib, Mohamed; Strieth, Sebastian; Künzel, Julian; Bischof, F.; Hackenberg, Berit; Huppertz, Tilmann; Weber, Veronika; Bahr, Katharina; Eckrich, Jonas; Hagemann, Jan; Engelbarts, Matthias; Froelich, Matthias F.; Solbach, Philipp; Linke, R.; Matthias, Christoph; Sommer, Wieland H.; Becker, Sven

doi:10.1186/s12880-019-0325-5

Cited by 23 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A controversial topic of discussion in the early days of structured reporting was whether SR templates do offer the required degrees of flexibility for everyday clinical practice. Previous studies were able to deflect these concerns and point out that rigid reporting conditions are beneficial during the learning process [19,20,23,24,37,38]. It remained uncertain at which training level structured reporting should be implemented.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Free text reporting was carried out using a standardized, handwritten template which used to be our department's standard. Structured reporting was performed through a specifically designed online-based software (Smart Reporting GmbH, Munich, Germany, http:// www.smart-reporting.com) for HNU as previously published [19,20,23].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consequently, report quality was categorized as very high (80 -100%), high (60 -80%), moderate (40 -60%), poor (20 -40%) or insufficient (0 -20%). Besides, user contentment was evaluated using an established questionnaire [19,20,23]. Participating medical students and residents were surveyed about practicability (question 1), usefulness in everyday practice (question 2), improvement in report-quality (question 3), time efficiency, timewise economy (question 4), justification of additional time needed (question 5), benefits for inexperienced physicians learning ultrasound examinations (question 6) and reporting (question 7) of the head and neck, usability by intuition (question 8) and clarity of arrangement of the template (question 9) using a ten-point visual analogue scale.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The implementation of structured reports (SR) into clinical practice has been shown to overcome these obstacles by standardizing the report content and terminology of HNU and other imaging techniques [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25]. On the one hand, the use of SRs decreases the risk of missing key structures and increases the user satisfaction of examining and referring physicians [21,22,[26][27][28][29][30].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While different clinical studies were able to demonstrate that the implementation of structured reporting of HNU increases report quality and time efficiency [19,20,23], there is no data at which the level of training SRs should be introduced in order to accomplish the best possible benefit. Even though it may be suggestive that the highest profit can be achieved by the earliest possible implementation, the opposite could be the case.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of optimal education level to implement structured reporting into ultrasound training

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims: Reporting of head and neck ultrasound (HNU) has been outlined to be a major obstacle during ultrasound training due to a lack of standardized structure, content and terminology. Consequently, overall report quality differs significantly between various examiners posing a severe risk factor for information loss and miscommunication. Therefore, the present study’s purpose is to compare the overall quality of free text reports (FTR) and structured reports (SR) of HNU at various stages of training in order to determine the optimal educational level to implement SR.Material and methods: Typical pathologies in HNU were reported upon using SR and FTR by medical students, junior residents and senior residents. The reports were assessed for overall quality, time efficiency and readability. Additionally, user satisfaction was determined using a questionnaire.Results: SRs exhibited a significantly superior report quality (93.1% vs. 45.6%, p<0.001) at all training levels. Overall time efficiency was significantly better for SRs, especially at the stages of medical school and early residency (89.4 s vs. 160.2 s., p<0.001). Using structured reporting also increased user satisfaction significantly (VAS 8.6 vs. 3.9, p<0.001).Conclusions: Implementing structured reporting of HNU results in a superior report quality at all training stages. Greatest benefits for time efficiency are achieved by implementation during medical school. Therefore, structured reporting of HNU should be implemented early on in the training of HNU.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of optimal education level to implement structured reporting into ultrasound training

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Inter‐Rater Reliability of Thyroid Ultrasound Risk Criteria: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The most commonly employed diagnostic criteria for identifying thyroid nodules include Thyroid Imaging and Reporting Data System (TI-RADS) and American Thyroid Association (ATA) guidelines. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine the inter-rater reliability of thyroid ultrasound criteria.Methods: We performed a library search of MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), and Web of Science for full-text articles published from January 2005 to June 2022. We included full-text primary research articles that used TI-RADS and/or ATA guidelines to evaluate thyroid nodules in adults. These included studies must have calculated inter-rater reliability using any validated metric. The Quality Appraisal for Reliability Studies (QAREL) was used to assess study quality. We planned for a random-effects meta-analysis, in addition to covariate and publication bias analyses. This study was performed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis guidelines and registered prior to conduction (International prospective register of systematic reviews-PROSPERO: CRD42021275072).Results: Of the 951 articles identified via the database search, 35 met eligibility criteria. All studies were observational. The most commonly utilized criteria were ACR Thyroid Imaging and Reporting Data System (TI-RADS) and/or ATA criteria, while the majority of studies employed Κ statistics. For ACR TI-RADS, the pooled Κ was 0.51 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.42, 0.57; n = 7) while for ATA, the pooled Κ was 0.52 (95% CI: 0.37, 0.67; n = 3). Due to the small number of studies, covariate or publication bias analyses were not performed.Conclusion: Ultrasound criteria demonstrate moderate inter-rater reliability, but these findings are impacted by poor study quality and a lack of standardization.

show abstract

Qualität in der Befundung von Kopf- und Halssonographien an Universitätskliniken – eine Stichprobe

Künzel

Bozzato

Ernst

et al. 2021

HNO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Zusammenfassung Hintergrund Die Ultraschalldiagnostik gilt für den Radiologen, Hals-Nasen-Ohren-Arzt (HNO) oder Mund-Kiefer-Gesichts-Chirurgen als Standard in der Abklärung zahlreicher Pathologien. Es besteht ein Konsens, dass die digitale Dokumentation heute dringend notwendig ist, um die Qualität der sonographischen Dokumentationen zu verbessern und zu standardisieren. Es häufen sich Publikationen zur Implementierung standardisierter Befunddokumentation einschließlich der Kopf- und Halssonographie. Ziel der Arbeit Die vorliegende Arbeit zielt darauf ab, die Qualität von routinemäßig angefertigten Kopf- und Halssonographiebefunden nach Kriterien der Kassenärztlichen Vereinigung (KV) Bayern an einer Auswahl deutscher HNO-Universitätskliniken stichprobenartig zu ermitteln. Material und Methoden Insgesamt wurden retrospektiv 70 zufällig ausgewählte, anonymisierte schriftliche Befunde einschließlich Bildmaterial von insgesamt 7 HNO-Universitätskliniken stichprobenartig nach KV-Kriterien durch einen erfahrenen Prüfer der KV Bayern ausgewertet und deskriptiv analysiert. Ergebnisse Von 70 Befunden konnten 69 ausgewertet werden. Die Dokumentationsvollständigkeit lag im Mittel bei 80,6 %. Neun Befunde waren vollständig korrekt dokumentiert (13 %). Die Dokumentationsvollständigkeit der einzelnen Kliniken lag zwischen 68,1 % und 93 %. Mit 88,5 % vs. 75 % erbrachte eine strukturierte Befundung eine höhere Befundvollständigkeit. In 75 % der Fälle verfügten die Kliniken mit strukturiertem Befund auch über digitale Dokumentationslösungen. Schlussfolgerung Die Vollständigkeit und Qualität von routinemäßig angefertigten Kopf- und Halssonographiebefunden an einer Auswahl von HNO-Universitätskliniken ist insgesamt optimierbar. Die Implementierung strukturierter Befundmasken und die Umstellung der analogen Dokumentation auf digitale Lösungen sowie Vernetzung mit dem Klinikinformationssystem (KIS) und Bildarchivierungs- und Kommunikationssystem (PACS) sollte weiter vorangetrieben werden. Darüber hinaus sind leitende Ärzte dazu angehalten, die Befundqualität unerfahrener Kollegen regelmäßig zu prüfen und im Rahmen der Facharztausbildung auf die Erfüllung entsprechender Standards wie der KV-Ultraschallvereinbarung hinzuarbeiten.

show abstract

Structured reporting of head and neck ultrasound examinations

Cited by 23 publications

References 37 publications

Evaluation of optimal education level to implement structured reporting into ultrasound training

Evaluation of optimal education level to implement structured reporting into ultrasound training

Inter‐Rater Reliability of Thyroid Ultrasound Risk Criteria: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Qualität in der Befundung von Kopf- und Halssonographien an Universitätskliniken – eine Stichprobe

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About