This poster is published under an
open license. Please read the
disclaimer for further details.
Keywords:
Oncology, Professional issues, CT, PACS, RIS, Health policy and practice, Outcomes analysis, Structured reporting, Cancer, Outcomes, Education and training
Authors:
D. J. Vining, R. Kampalath, R. Bassett, P. Fox, A. Tsimberidou; Houston, TX/US
DOI:
10.1594/ecr2014/C-2138
Conclusion
Our study revealed that radiologists at an NCI-designated cancer center failed to consistently report on the same lesions in serial examinations which hinders the performance of RECIST and other forms of tumor response assessment.
Radiologists frequently reported a set of lesions on baseline examinations,
but different radiologists reporting on subsequent examinations described different sets of findings that did not correlate directly with those in the baseline examinations.
Potential solutions to this problem of discontinuity in radiology reporting include the following:
- Educating radiologists about the importance and practice of conducting serial tumor assessment.
- Conducting quality audits of radiology reports to identify deficient practices such as was done in this study.
- Using structured reporting methods to capture,
manage,
and display serial exam data (Figure 3).
A radiology report is the ultimate product delivered by a radiologist,
and the quality of a report determines the value that a radiologist contributes to the healthcare enterprise.
Radiologists must strive to improve the continuity of radiological information across serial examinations,
especially for cancer patients in whom accurate tumor response assessment is critical to treatment decisions.