TY - JOUR
T1 - Structured reporting of CT scans of patients with trauma leads to faster, more detailed diagnoses
T2 - An experimental study
AU - Jorg, Tobias
AU - Heckmann, Julia Caroline
AU - Mildenberger, Philipp
AU - Hahn, Felix
AU - Düber, Christoph
AU - Mildenberger, Peter
AU - Kloeckner, Roman
AU - Jungmann, Florian
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2021/11
Y1 - 2021/11
N2 - Purpose: This study aimed to determine whether structured reports (SRs) reduce reporting time and/or increase the level of detail for trauma CT scans compared to free-text reports (FTRs). Method: Eight radiology residents used SRs and FTRs to describe 14 whole-body CT scans of patients with polytrauma in a simulated emergency room setting. Each resident created both a brief report and a detailed report for each case using one of the two formats. We measured the time to complete the detailed reports and established a scoring system to objectively measure report completeness and the level of detail. Scoring sheets divided the CT findings into main and secondary criteria. Finally, the radiological residents completed a questionnaire on their opinions of the SRs and FTRs. Results: The detailed SRs were completed significantly faster than the detailed FTRs (mean 19 min vs. 25 min; p < 0.001). The maximum allowance of 25 min was used for 25% of SRs and 59% of FTRs. For brief reports, the SRs contained more secondary criteria than the FTRs (p = 0.001), but no significant differences were detected in main criteria. Study participants rated their own SRs as significantly more time-efficient, concise, and clearly structured compared to the FTRs. However, SRs and FTRs were rated similarly for quality, accuracy, and completeness. Conclusion: We found that SRs for whole-body trauma CT add clinical value compared to FTRs because SRs reduce reporting time and increase the level of detail for trauma CT scans.
AB - Purpose: This study aimed to determine whether structured reports (SRs) reduce reporting time and/or increase the level of detail for trauma CT scans compared to free-text reports (FTRs). Method: Eight radiology residents used SRs and FTRs to describe 14 whole-body CT scans of patients with polytrauma in a simulated emergency room setting. Each resident created both a brief report and a detailed report for each case using one of the two formats. We measured the time to complete the detailed reports and established a scoring system to objectively measure report completeness and the level of detail. Scoring sheets divided the CT findings into main and secondary criteria. Finally, the radiological residents completed a questionnaire on their opinions of the SRs and FTRs. Results: The detailed SRs were completed significantly faster than the detailed FTRs (mean 19 min vs. 25 min; p < 0.001). The maximum allowance of 25 min was used for 25% of SRs and 59% of FTRs. For brief reports, the SRs contained more secondary criteria than the FTRs (p = 0.001), but no significant differences were detected in main criteria. Study participants rated their own SRs as significantly more time-efficient, concise, and clearly structured compared to the FTRs. However, SRs and FTRs were rated similarly for quality, accuracy, and completeness. Conclusion: We found that SRs for whole-body trauma CT add clinical value compared to FTRs because SRs reduce reporting time and increase the level of detail for trauma CT scans.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85115383229&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109954
DO - 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109954
M3 - Journal articles
C2 - 34563796
AN - SCOPUS:85115383229
SN - 0720-048X
VL - 144
JO - European Journal of Radiology
JF - European Journal of Radiology
M1 - 109954
ER -