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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bink, Andrea, Benner, Jan, Reinhardt, Julia, De Vere-Tyndall, Anthony, Stieltjes, Bram, Hainc, Nicolin, Stippich, Christoph
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