Ultrasound and Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry Report Transcription Error Rates and Strategies for Reduction

Bauer, Arielle; Lind, Kimberly E.; Noort, Hilary Van; Myers, Mallory E.; Borgstede, James P.

doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2018.01.020

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The volume of patients undergoing US examinations has rapidly increased over the years; this is attributable to the wide clinical application, convenience, and easy access of US 2 . In our research, the number of US examinations in the 20‐month period immediately after adoption of the reminder system was 13.5% higher than that in the 20‐month period immediately preceding adoption of the system (average daily caseload, 88).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 69%

“…With the advances in medical information technology, ultrasound (US) reports have evolved from manual writing to computer typing; this has helped improve work efficiency 1 . However, deficiencies or errors in US reports are not uncommon; most of the quality issues pertaining to US reports are related to typing defects or errors (such as incomplete report content or laterality errors) 2 . These errors may have serious physical, physiologic, or psychological repercussions for the patients 3 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An Intelligent Reminder System Reduces Deficiencies and Errors in Ultrasound Reports

Zhang

Jin

et al. 2020

J of Ultrasound Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives We designed a computer‐based, integrated intelligent reminder system to reduce the deficiencies and errors in ultrasound (US) reports. In this study, we assessed the performance of this system and evaluated its impact on the quality of US reporting. Methods Ultrasound reporting deficiencies or errors were divided into 2 categories: missing items (including outpatient or inpatient number and clinical diagnosis) and content errors (including measurement data, sex‐related, and laterality errors). The intelligent reminder system was designed in Visual Basic for Applications (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA) and integrated with the US system. It automatically detects reporting errors before printing of the report and provides real‐time prompts for correction of the errors. We compared the US reporting deficiencies and errors during the 20 months before and after implementation of the system. Results Before implementation of the system, deficiencies/errors were detected in 2.26% (8841 of 391,230) of US reports compared with 0.12% (530 of 444,215) of reports after implementation of the system (P < .0001). After adoption of the system, the reported item deficiencies were improved more than the content deficiencies, with the most notable improvement in clinical diagnosis. Sex‐related errors were reduced from 7 cases to nil after use of the intelligent reminder system. No laterality errors were found before and after the implementation of the system. Conclusions The intelligent reminder system within the US system significantly reduced deficiencies and errors, improving the quality of the report.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 69%

mentioning

confidence: 99%