Publication date: Available online 23 November 2017
Source:Academic Radiology
Author(s): Zeeshaan S. Bhatti, Richard K.J. Brown, Ella A. Kazerooni, Matthew S. Davenport
Rationale and ObjectivesThis study aimed to determine the preferences of radiology and referring provider residents regarding direct communication of radiology test results.MethodsThis Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant quality improvement effort was exempt from institutional review board oversight. An anonymous survey was emailed to 44 radiology residents and 364 referring resident providers who routinely provide or receive direct communication of test results at our quaternary care medical center. The survey focused on the frequency, indication, clinical utility, and methods of direct communication of radiology results. Proportions were compared to chi-square or Fisher exact test.ResultsThe response rates were 86% (37 of 43) (radiology) and 41% (151 of 364) (referring providers). Approximately half of radiology residents (49% [18 of 37]) thought the frequency of direct verbal communication was excessive, and none (0 of 37) thought more communication was needed. In contrast, only 1.3% (2 of 151; P < .001) of referring providers felt the frequency was excessive, and 24% (36 of 151; P < .001) desired more. The majority (66% [100 of 151]) of referring providers felt phone calls from radiologists often or always added value beyond a timely radiology report, and 59% (44 of 74) felt it is the radiologist's responsibility to call about abnormal findings. Furthermore, 83% (125 of 151) of referring providers preferred to receive a phone call about non-emergent unexpected findings, although preferences varied for various example abnormalities. For outpatients with non-emergent unexpected findings, most providers (90% [64 of 71]) prefer written communication rather than a phone call.ConclusionsReferring providers prefer direct communication of radiology results, even for non-urgent unexpected findings, whereas radiology residents prefer less direct communication and are more likely to consider radiologist-to-provider communication superfluous.
from Imaging via alkiviadis.1961 on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2B6tfIn
Εγγραφή σε:
Σχόλια ανάρτησης (Atom)
Δημοφιλείς αναρτήσεις
-
Publication date: Available online 4 January 2018 Source: European Journal of Radiology Author(s): Peiyao Zhang, Jing Wang, Qin Xu, Zhen...
-
Medicine by Alexandros G. Sfakianakis,Anapafseos 5 Agios Nikolaos 72100 Crete Greece,00302841026182, Butyric Acid from Probiotic Staphyloco...
-
Does CBD Oil Lower Blood Pressure? This article was originally published at SundayScaries." Madeline Taylor POSTED ON January 13, 20...
-
Medicine by Alexandros G. Sfakianakis,Αλέξανδρος Γ. Σφακιανάκης A Novel Technique for Endoscopic Repair of Large Anterior Skull Base Defect...
-
2016-11-22T07-55-59Z Source: International Journal of Medical Science and Public Health Banothu Srinivas, Madhu Mohan Reddy B. Backgrou...
-
2016-10-15T06-30-01Z Source: The Southeast Asian Journal of Case Report and Review Sangita Deepak Kamath, Neeraj Jain, Saurabh Pathak, Ba...
-
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Lesion load is a common biomarker in multiple sclerosis, yet it has historically shown modest association with cl...
-
Abstract The development of focused ion beam-scanning electron microscopy (FIB-SEM) techniques has allowed high-resolution 3D imaging of n...
-
Vol.48 No.2 from #AlexandrosSfakianakis via Alexandros G.Sfakianakis on Inoreader http://ift.tt/1S2Z7n2 via IFTTT
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου