Type:
Educational Exhibit
Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence, Conventional radiography, Technology assessment, Quality assurance
Authors:
S. Karunasena, M. Vasimalla, C. Jones
DOI:
10.26044/ranzcr2022/R-0203
Imaging findings OR Procedure details
Pilot Study:
The 11 radiologists in the pilot study reported a total of 2972 CXR cases from 2665 patients, with accompanying feedback. The male:female distribution across the cases was 52.7% : 47.3%.
The per-case feedback data acquired via the modified device user interface showed that in 3.1% of reports (92 studies), significant interpretive changes were made that were attributable to the device. In almost half of these cases (1.4% of total cases) the AI device’s interpretation led to changes in patient management. In 1.0% of total cases, AI device findings led to recommendations for further imaging. The observation was also made that the proportion of reports changed was higher for radiologists with less consultant experience, with the 0-5yrs experience group making changes in 5.0% of reports compared to 3.1% for the whole radiologist group.
The end-of-pilot survey showed that 90% of radiologists in the pilot were satisfied with the accuracy of the tool. 70% thought there was a positive impact on reporting time and 20% thought the impact was neutral. All radiologists felt the device was easy to use and 90% thought it was well-integrated and felt confident to use it. 60% of users indicated that they would be disappointed if they no longer had access to the device. These results are displayed in Figures 3-5.
Post-Implementation Feedback:
Feedback after wider implementation showed 93% of radiologists continued using the device at two months. 90% thought it positively impacted their reporting. 75% felt reporting times were not negatively impacted (25% reported subjective improvement, 50% felt reporting efficiency was no different with the device). 75% did not encounter significant technical difficulties using the product, 88% were satisfied with training documentation provided. Most importantly, 73% of radiologists indicated they would be disappointed if they were no longer able to use the device.