The fate of radiology report recommendations at a pediatric medical center

Medical Malpractice and Diagnostic Radiology: Challenges and Opportunities

Medicolegal challenges in radiology are broad and impact both radiologists and patients. Radiologists may be affected directly by malpractice litigation or indirectly due to defensive imaging ordering practices. Patients also could be harmed physically, emotionally, or financially by unnecessary tests or procedures. As technology advances, the incorporation of artificial intelligence into medicine will bring with it new medicolegal challenges and opportunities. This article reviews the current and emerging direct and indirect effects of medical malpractice on radiologists and summarizes evidence-based solutions.

Opportunistic CT Assessment of Parathyroid Glands: Utility of Radiologist-Recommended Biochemical Evaluation for Diagnosing Primary Hyperparathyroidism

BACKGROUND. Existing gaps in primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT) diagnosis and treatment have prompted calls for systemic change in the approach to this disease. One proposed change is opportunistic assessment for enlarged parathyroid glands on routine CT examinations, to target biochemical testing to individuals most likely to have un-diagnosed PHPT. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to assess the utility of a radiologist recommendation for biochemical testing in patients with a suspected enlarged parathyroid gland on routine CT for identifying previously undiagnosed PHPT. METHODS. This retrospective study included patients without known or suspected PHPT who underwent routine CT (i.e., performed for reasons other than known or suspected parathyroid disease) between August 2019 and September 2021 in which the clinical CT report included a radiologist recommendation for biochemical testing to evaluate for possible PHPT because of a suspected enlarged parathyroid gland. Neuroradiologists at the study institution included this recommendation on the basis of individual judgment without formal criteria. The EHR was reviewed to identify patients who underwent subsequent laboratory evaluation for PHPT. An endocrine surgeon used available laboratory results and clinical data to classify patients as having PHPT, secondary hyper-parathyroidism, or no parathyroid disorder independent of the CT findings. RESULTS. The sample comprised 39 patients (median age, 68 years; 20 women, 19 men) who received the radiologist recommendation for biochemical evaluation. Of these patients, 13 (33.3%) received the recommended biochemical evaluation. Of the 13 tested patients, three (23.1%) were classified as having PHPT, four (30.8%) as having secondary hyperparathyroidism, and six (46.2%) as having no parathyroid disorder. Thus, the number of patients needing to receive a radiologist recommendation for biochemical testing per correct PHPT diagnosis was 13.0, and the number of patients needing to undergo laboratory testing per correct PHPT diagnosis was 4.3. One of the three patients classified as having PHPT underwent surgical resection of the lesion identified by CT, which was shown on histopathologic evaluation to represent hypercellular parathyroid tissue. CONCLUSION. Radiologist recommendations for biochemical testing in patients with suspected enlarged parathyroid glands on routine CT helped to identify individuals with undiagnosed PHPT. CLINICAL IMPACT. Opportunistic assessment for enlarged parathyroid glands on routine CT may facilitate PHPT diagnosis.

Informatics Solutions to Mitigate Legal Risk Associated With Communication Failures

Communication failures are a documented cause of malpractice litigation against radiologists. As imaging volumes have increased, and with them the number of findings requiring further workup, radiologists are increasingly expected to communicate with ordering clinicians. However, communication may be unsuccessful for a variety of reasons that expose radiologists to potential malpractice risk. Informatics solutions have the potential to improve communication and decrease this risk. We discuss human-powered, purely automated, and hybrid approaches to closing the communications loop. In addition, we describe the Patient Test Results Information Act (Pennsylvania Act 112) and its implications for closing the loop on noncritical actionable findings.

Novel Quality Measure Set: Closing the Completion Loop on Radiology Follow-up Recommendations for Noncritical Actionable Incidental Findings

BACKGROUND

Care gaps occur when radiology follow-up recommendations are poorly communicated or not completed, resulting in missed or delayed diagnosis potentially leading to worse patient outcomes. This ACR-led initiative assembled a technical expert panel (TEP) to advise development of quality measures intended to improve communication and drive increased completion rates for radiology follow-up recommendations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multistakeholder TEP was assembled to advise the development of quality measures. The project scope, limited to noncritical actionable incidental findings (AIFs), encourages practices to develop and implement systems ensuring appropriate communication and follow-up to completion.

RESULTS

A suite of nine measures were developed: four outcome measures include closing the loop on completion of radiology follow-up recommendations for nonemergent AIFs (with pulmonary nodule and abdominal aortic aneurysm use cases) and overall cancer diagnoses. Five process measures address communication and tracking of AIFs: inclusion of available evidence or guidelines informing the recommendation, communication of AIFs to the practice managing ongoing care, identifying when AIFs have been communicated to the patient, and employing tracking and reminder systems for AIFs.

CONCLUSION

This ACR-led initiative developed a measure set intended to improve patient outcomes by ensuring that AIFs are appropriately communicated and followed up. The intent of these measures is to focus improvement on specific areas in which gaps in communication and AIF follow-up may occur, prompting systems to devote resources that will identify and implement solutions to improve patient care.

Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System Category 3 on Surveillance Computed Tomography: Incidence, Biopsy Rate, and Predictive Performance in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System (NI-RADS) is a radiology reporting system for head and neck cancer surveillance. Imaging findings of high suspicion for recurrence are assigned Category 3 and recommended for "Biopsy, if clinically indicated." After implementing NI-RADS for surveillance neck computed tomography (CT), our objectives are to determine the incidence of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) Category 3 lesions in the year post-implementation, the associated biopsy rate, and the positive predictive value of NI-RADS 3 for SCC recurrence.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

Neck CTs reported with NI-RADS between February 2020 and February 2021 were reviewed to identify patients undergoing surveillance for SCC assigned NI-RADS 3. Cancer recurrence, defined as positive biopsy result or treatment of clinically determined recurrence, was determined by electronic medical record review.

RESULTS

During the study period, 580 neck CTs were reported with NI-RADS, of which 39 (7%) CTs obtained in 37 unique patients (28 male, 9 female, mean age 66.6 years) formed the study cohort. Biopsies were obtained in 23 lesions (45%), of which 17 (74%) were positive for recurrent SCC. One nondiagnostic biopsy was clinically determined to represent recurrence. Of 28 (55%) lesions not biopsied, 18 (64%) were ultimately treated as clinically determined recurrence. Thus, among 51 individual NI-RADS 3 lesions (32 primary, 19 neck), 36 (71%) represented recurrence.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of NI-RADS 3 lesions in our cohort was 7%. The biopsy rate was 45%, and the overall positive predictive value of NI-RADS 3 for recurrent SCC was 71%. Category 3 lesions are associated with substantial SCC recurrence risk and should be managed accordingly.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 Laryngoscope, 2022.

Assessment of the Response to Abdominal and Pelvic Computed Tomography Report Recommendations: A Single-Center, Retrospective, Chart Review Study

Objectives

The radiology report is the primary form of communication between the radiologists and referring clinicians. It is a structured document containing several key components pertaining to the interpretation of radiological examinations and may require the addition of follow-up imaging recommendations to optimize patient outcomes. This study aims to determine whether follow-up imaging recommendations are being acknowledged and acted upon by referrers.

Methods

This retrospective study was conducted at a single tertiary hospital. Prerecorded BESTCare data of patients who underwent abdominal and pelvic computed tomography (CT) scans between October 1, 2017, and December 31, 2017, and received recommendations for further evaluation were collected after obtaining ethical approval from the local authority. Data of patients younger than 14 years old, patients who did not receive a recommendation, and patients who had CT scans that were uploaded to the BESTCare system but were performed outside the institution were excluded. The collected data were recorded in a password-protected Microsoft Excel file for further analysis.

Results

A total of 523 report recommendations from 422 abdominal and pelvic CT reports were analyzed. The most common organs indicated for CT scan evaluation were the breast (N = 54, 10.33%), kidney (N = 46, 8.80%), lymph node (N = 36, 6.88%), and colon (N = 33, 6.31%). The most common type of further evaluation recommended was further imaging (N = 410, 78.39%). A total of 278 (53.15%) recommendations were not performed, with 199 (71.58%) not having a documented rationale for noncompliance.

Conclusion

The majority of the follow-up imaging recommendations to ordering physicians were not carried out. This study highlights the need for notification and audit systems to monitor compliance with follow-up recommendations. Improving the communication between radiologists and referring physicians is key to optimizing patient healthcare.

Closing the Compliance Loop on Follow-Up Imaging Recommendations: Comparing Radiologists' and Administrators' Attitudes

PURPOSE

To compare non-physician healthcare professional and radiologists' survey responses regarding attitudes and current practices, policies, and procedures related to the follow-up of nonemergent actionable incidental findings (AIF).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The American College of Radiology (ACR) developed a survey with input from a technical expert panel (TEP). Survey items were developed by TEP members, refined by an ACR market research expert, and were examined for face and construct validity. The survey was distributed among ACR membership and various medical professional organizations. Responses from non-physician responders and radiologists were analyzed and compared using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

The analysis included 375 responses, 247 from radiologists and 128 from non-physicians. All respondent groups stated that radiology follow-up recommendations are evidence-based. Both respondent groups indicated that there is up to moderate risk associated with AIF follow-up. Both respondent groups similarly favored that the accountability for communicating AIF lies first with the ordering provider, followed by primary care providers, then the patient, and lastly an automated process that is managed by a staff member and/or the radiologist. All respondent groups indicated that tracking processes were more commonly funded by the healthcare system than through the radiology budget.

CONCLUSION

There is alignment between non-physicians and radiologists regarding the implementation of tracking systems that assure completion of radiology follow-up recommendations. Building tracking systems represents an opportunity for multi-disciplinary collaboration to address care transition communication and process gaps.

Engaging patients and families in pediatric radiology

While patient and family-centered care (PFCC) is currently a hot topic in medicine, it has long been a specific focus of pediatrics. The concept of PFCC includes a change in culture where physicians and patients move away from paternalism and instead view patients and families as partners in care. Although there are many ways in which adult-focused radiologists can learn from pediatric radiologists as leaders in PFCC, there remain many opportunities for improvement for all radiologists.

Disparities in PET Imaging for Prostate Cancer at a Tertiary Academic Medical Center

The purpose of this study was to evaluate differences between patients receiving ¹⁸F-fluciclovine and ⁶⁸Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen (⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11) for biochemically recurrent prostate cancer at a tertiary medical center. Methods: All ¹⁸F-fluciclovine and ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 PET studies performed at the University of California San Francisco from October 2015 to January 2020 were reviewed. Age, race/ethnicity, primary language, body mass index, insurance type, and home address were obtained through the electronic medical record. A logistic regression model was used to evaluate the predictor variables. Results: In total, 1,502 patients received ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 and 254 patients received ¹⁸F-fluciclovine. Black patients had increased odds of receiving imaging with ¹⁸F-fluciclovine versus ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 compared with non-Hispanic White patients (odds ratio, 3.88; 95% CI, 1.90-7.91). There were no other statistically significant differences. Conclusion: In patients receiving molecular imaging for prostate cancer at a single U.S. tertiary medical center, access to ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 for Black patients was limited, compared with non-Hispanic White patients, by a factor of nearly 4.

Prevalence and Clinical Significance of Incidental Vertebral Marrow Signal Abnormality in Thoracolumbar Spine MRI

STUDY DESIGN

A cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE

This study investigates the prevalence of incidental vertebral marrow signal abnormality (VMSA) in thoracolumbar spine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) ordered for the evaluation of back and/or leg pain and assess the clinical work-up for VMSAs.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Patients presenting with back pain are often referred for spine MRI for diagnostic evaluation. VMSA is most frequently found in the lumbar spine and is of clinical concern because it can represent malignancy. Standardized procedures for reporting and managing VMSAs do not exist.

METHODS

The radiology database at the Oregon Health & Science University health system was queried to identify patients with thoracolumbar spine MRI scans performed between January 2014 and June 2016. Patients 16 years or older with MRIs ordered by providers at a multidisciplinary spine specialty clinic for the diagnostic evaluation of back and/or leg pain were included. Radiology reports were searched for keywords pertaining to VMSAs, such as "malignancy." Medical records of these patients were further reviewed for the clinical work-up and final diagnoses pertaining to the VMSA.

RESULTS

The study sample included 1503 individual patients, of whom 65 (4%) had MRI radiology reports that described a VMSA. Thirty-one (48%) of the 65 patients with VMSAs had further evaluation recommended by radiology. Ten (32%) of these 31 patients were followed clinically without further diagnostic testing for the VMSA. Of the 65 patients with VMSAs, only one was diagnosed with malignancy (multiple myeloma).

CONCLUSION

While VMSAs are not frequently found on thoracolumbar MRIs ordered to evaluate back and/or leg pain, there is a large amount of heterogeneity in how these abnormalities are documented and managed. This may indicate the need for clinical guidelines for the reporting and management of VMSAs detected on spine MRI and for improvement in communication between radiologists and ordering providers.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Trends of Follow-Up Recommendations Made on Musculoskeletal MRI Reports

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article was to analyze trends in follow-up recommendations made on musculoskeletal MRI reports. MATERIALS AND METHODS. An IRB-approved retrospective study identified 790 musculoskeletal MRI reports from our database between January 1, 2016, and January 1, 2018, containing follow-up recommendations made by the interpreting radiologist. Metadata were automatically extracted and classification of the recommendations was performed by manual review. Clinical outcome data were collected from the electronic health record. After exclusion criteria were applied, 654 reports were included in the study. Descriptive statistics, Fisher exact tests, and chi-square tests were used for analysis. RESULTS. Clinicians acknowledged 83% and followed 73% of the recommendations. Follow-up compliance varied with the type of recommendation made: 98% for clinical intervention versus 67% for additional imaging (p < 0.001). Subspecialties acknowledged and followed recommendations at different rates: 92% and 85% for internists versus 76% and 64% for orthopedists (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001), respectively. Patient age, practice setting, radiologist experience, recommendation conditionality, and specified follow-up time intervals made no difference in compliance rate (all p > 0.05). There was no difference in compliance rate among various pathologic findings of concern (p = 0.995). Compliance rate increased significantly after direct communication between the radiologist and clinician compared with when there was no direct communication (93% vs 71%, p < 0.001). Concern for neoplasm comprised the greatest number of unacknowledged recommendations (73%). CONCLUSION. Musculoskeletal MRI recommendations are followed independent of the finding of concern and compliance is lowest for requests of additional imaging. Direct communication improves compliance and may be particularly helpful for orthopedic referrers.