Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Acad Radiol. 2019 Jan 17. pii: S1076-6332(19)30016-9. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2018.12.023. [Epub ahead of print]

Institutional Implementation of a Structured Reporting System: Our Experience with the Brain Tumor Reporting and Data System.

Author information

1
Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University Hospital, 1364 Clifton Rd. NE, Atlanta, GA.
2
Department of Radiation Oncology, Emory University Hospital, Atlanta, Georgia.
3
Department of Neurosurgery, Emory University Hospital, Atlanta, Georgia.
4
Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Emory University Hospital, Atlanta, Georgia.
5
Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University Hospital, 1364 Clifton Rd. NE, Atlanta, GA. Electronic address: brent.d.weinberg@emory.edu.

Abstract

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES:

Analyze the impact of implementing a structured reporting system for primary brain tumors, the Brain Tumor Reporting and Data System, on attitudes toward radiology reports at a single institution.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Following Institutional Review Board approval, an initial 22 question, 5 point (1-worst to 5-best), survey was sent to faculty members, house staff members, and nonphysician providers at our institution who participate in the direct care of brain tumor patients. Results were used to develop a structured reporting strategy for brain tumors which was implemented across an entire neuroradiology section in a staged approach. Nine months following structured reporting implementation, a follow-up 27 question survey was sent to the same group of providers. Keyword search of radiology reports was used to assess usage of Brain Tumor Reporting and Data System over time.

RESULTS:

Fifty-three brain tumor care providers responded to the initial survey and 38 to the follow-up survey. After implementing BT-RADS, respondents reported improved attitudes across multiple areas including: report consistency (4.3 vs. 3.4; p < 0.001), report ambiguity (4.2 vs. 3.2, p < 0.001), radiologist/physician communication (4.5 vs. 3.8; p < 0.001), facilitation of patient management (4.2 vs. 3.6; p = 0.003), and confidence in reports (4.3 vs. 3.5; p < 0.001). Providers were more satisfied with the BT-RADS structured reporting system (4.3 vs. 3.7; p = 0.04). Use of the reporting template progressively increased with 81% of brain tumor reports dictated using the new template by 9 months.

CONCLUSION:

Implementing a structured template for brain tumor imaging improves perception of radiology reports among radiologists and referring providers involved in the care of brain tumor patients.

KEYWORDS:

Brain tumor; Glioblastoma; Patient care; Response criteria; Structured template

PMID:
30661977
DOI:
10.1016/j.acra.2018.12.023

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center