Development of a Radiology Report Monitoring System for Case Tracking

Development of minimum data set and dashboard for monitoring adverse events in radiology departments

Background

To reduce the risk of errors, patient safety monitoring in the medical imaging department is crucial. Interventions are required and these can be provided as a framework for documenting, reporting, evaluating, and recognizing events that pose a threat to patient safety. The aim of this study was to develop minimum data set and dashboard for monitoring adverse events in radiology departments.

Material and methods

This developmental research was conducted in multiple phases, including content determination using the Delphi technique; database designing using SQL Server; user interface (UI) building using PHP; and dashboard evaluation in three aspects: the accuracy of calculating; UI requirements; and usability.

Results

This study identified 26 patient safety (PS) performance metrics and 110 PS-related significant data components organized into 14 major groupings as the system contents. The UI was built with three tabs: pre-procedure, intra-procedure, and post-procedure. The evaluation results proved the technical feasibility of the dashboard. Finally, the dashboard's usability was highly rated (76.3 out of 100).

Conclusion

The dashboard can be used to supplement datasets to obtain a more accurate picture of the PS condition and to draw attention to characteristics that professionals might otherwise overlook or undervalue.

Electronic messaging system for communicating important, but nonemergent, abnormal imaging results

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness of an electronic messaging system for accurately communicating important, but not emergent, abnormal radiology results to referring physicians.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Institutional Review Board deemed this proposal a quality improvement project that did not require formal approval. The electronic messaging system permits radiologists to submit online requests to communicate important, but not emergent, abnormal findings and recommended follow-up to two communications facilitators, who contact referring health care providers by e-mail or telephone. Of 10,510 electronic communications during a 3-year period, a representative sample of 500 communications were selected for detailed analysis. To eliminate bias associated with increased experience with the system, every 20th communication during the 3 years that the messaging system had been functional was examined. Parameters studied included the rate of successful communications with referring physicians, the frequency of these being accomplished within the goal of 48 hours from the time of radiologist submission, and the results of an e-mail survey of physicians to assess their satisfaction with the system.

RESULTS

The radiologic abnormality was successfully communicated to the referring physician in every communication. Overall, a mean of 82.2% ± 3.3 (standard deviation) of communications were accomplished within the goal of 48 hours, with this goal being met in 93.7% ± 2.3 of communications submitted Monday through 3 pm on Thursday. Satisfaction among referring physicians was high (79.0% ± 3.8 satisfied; 5.0% ± 2.0 dissatisfied), especially among those with the most experience with the system.

CONCLUSION

The electronic messaging system communicated important, but not emergent, abnormal radiology results to referring physicians in a timely, accurate, and relatively inexpensive manner.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

http://radiology.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1148/radiol.10101015/-/DC1.