Cargando…
Structured Reporting in Neuroradiology: Intracranial Tumors
PURPOSE: The aim of this pilot study was to assess the clinical feasibility, diagnostic yield, advantages, and disadvantages of structured reporting for routine MRI-reading in patients with primary diagnosis of intracranial tumors as compared to traditional neuroradiological free text reporting. MET...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5808104/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29467712 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2018.00032 |
_version_ | 1783299401368731648 |
---|---|
author | Bink, Andrea Benner, Jan Reinhardt, Julia De Vere-Tyndall, Anthony Stieltjes, Bram Hainc, Nicolin Stippich, Christoph |
author_facet | Bink, Andrea Benner, Jan Reinhardt, Julia De Vere-Tyndall, Anthony Stieltjes, Bram Hainc, Nicolin Stippich, Christoph |
author_sort | Bink, Andrea |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: The aim of this pilot study was to assess the clinical feasibility, diagnostic yield, advantages, and disadvantages of structured reporting for routine MRI-reading in patients with primary diagnosis of intracranial tumors as compared to traditional neuroradiological free text reporting. METHODS: A structured MRI reporting template was developed covering pathological, anatomical, and functional aspects in an itemized fashion. Retrospectively, 60 consecutive patients with first diagnosis of an intracranial tumor were selected from the radiology information system/PACS system. Structured reporting was performed by a senior neuroradiologist, blinded to clinical and radiological data. Reporting times were measured per patient. The diagnostic content was compared to free text reporting which was independently performed on the same MRI exams by two other neuroradiologists. The comparisons were categorized per item as: “congruent,” “partially congruent,” “incongruent,” or “not mentioned in free-style report.” RESULTS: Tumor-related items: congruent findings were found for all items (17/17) with congruence rates ranging between 98 and 39% per item. Four items achieved congruence rates ≥90%, 5 items >80%, and 9 items ≥70%. Partially congruent findings were found for all items in up to 50% per item. Incongruent findings were present in 7/17 items in up to 5% per item. Free text reports did not mention 12 of 17 items (range 7–43% per item). Non-tumor-related items, including brain atrophy, microangiopathy, vascular pathologies, and various extracranial pathologies, which were not mentioned in free-text reports between 18 and 85% per item. Mean reporting time for structured reporting was 7:49 min (3:12–17:06 min). CONCLUSION: First results showed that expert structured reporting ensured reliable detection of all relevant brain pathologies along with reproducible documentation of all predefined diagnostic items, which was not always the case for free text reporting. A mean reporting time of 8 min per patient seems clinically feasible. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5808104 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-58081042018-02-21 Structured Reporting in Neuroradiology: Intracranial Tumors Bink, Andrea Benner, Jan Reinhardt, Julia De Vere-Tyndall, Anthony Stieltjes, Bram Hainc, Nicolin Stippich, Christoph Front Neurol Neuroscience PURPOSE: The aim of this pilot study was to assess the clinical feasibility, diagnostic yield, advantages, and disadvantages of structured reporting for routine MRI-reading in patients with primary diagnosis of intracranial tumors as compared to traditional neuroradiological free text reporting. METHODS: A structured MRI reporting template was developed covering pathological, anatomical, and functional aspects in an itemized fashion. Retrospectively, 60 consecutive patients with first diagnosis of an intracranial tumor were selected from the radiology information system/PACS system. Structured reporting was performed by a senior neuroradiologist, blinded to clinical and radiological data. Reporting times were measured per patient. The diagnostic content was compared to free text reporting which was independently performed on the same MRI exams by two other neuroradiologists. The comparisons were categorized per item as: “congruent,” “partially congruent,” “incongruent,” or “not mentioned in free-style report.” RESULTS: Tumor-related items: congruent findings were found for all items (17/17) with congruence rates ranging between 98 and 39% per item. Four items achieved congruence rates ≥90%, 5 items >80%, and 9 items ≥70%. Partially congruent findings were found for all items in up to 50% per item. Incongruent findings were present in 7/17 items in up to 5% per item. Free text reports did not mention 12 of 17 items (range 7–43% per item). Non-tumor-related items, including brain atrophy, microangiopathy, vascular pathologies, and various extracranial pathologies, which were not mentioned in free-text reports between 18 and 85% per item. Mean reporting time for structured reporting was 7:49 min (3:12–17:06 min). CONCLUSION: First results showed that expert structured reporting ensured reliable detection of all relevant brain pathologies along with reproducible documentation of all predefined diagnostic items, which was not always the case for free text reporting. A mean reporting time of 8 min per patient seems clinically feasible. Frontiers Media S.A. 2018-02-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5808104/ /pubmed/29467712 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2018.00032 Text en Copyright © 2018 Bink, Benner, Reinhardt, De Vere-Tyndall, Stieltjes, Hainc and Stippich. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Neuroscience Bink, Andrea Benner, Jan Reinhardt, Julia De Vere-Tyndall, Anthony Stieltjes, Bram Hainc, Nicolin Stippich, Christoph Structured Reporting in Neuroradiology: Intracranial Tumors |
title | Structured Reporting in Neuroradiology: Intracranial Tumors |
title_full | Structured Reporting in Neuroradiology: Intracranial Tumors |
title_fullStr | Structured Reporting in Neuroradiology: Intracranial Tumors |
title_full_unstemmed | Structured Reporting in Neuroradiology: Intracranial Tumors |
title_short | Structured Reporting in Neuroradiology: Intracranial Tumors |
title_sort | structured reporting in neuroradiology: intracranial tumors |
topic | Neuroscience |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5808104/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29467712 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2018.00032 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT binkandrea structuredreportinginneuroradiologyintracranialtumors AT bennerjan structuredreportinginneuroradiologyintracranialtumors AT reinhardtjulia structuredreportinginneuroradiologyintracranialtumors AT deveretyndallanthony structuredreportinginneuroradiologyintracranialtumors AT stieltjesbram structuredreportinginneuroradiologyintracranialtumors AT haincnicolin structuredreportinginneuroradiologyintracranialtumors AT stippichchristoph structuredreportinginneuroradiologyintracranialtumors |