Cargando…
Time Is Money: Considerations for Measuring the Radiological Reading Time
Timestamps in the Radiology Information System (RIS) are a readily available and valuable source of information with increasing significance, among others, due to the current focus on the clinical impact of artificial intelligence applications. We aimed to evaluate timestamp-based radiological dicta...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9394242/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35893086 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jimaging8080208 |
_version_ | 1784771444616462336 |
---|---|
author | Sexauer, Raphael Bestler, Caroline |
author_facet | Sexauer, Raphael Bestler, Caroline |
author_sort | Sexauer, Raphael |
collection | PubMed |
description | Timestamps in the Radiology Information System (RIS) are a readily available and valuable source of information with increasing significance, among others, due to the current focus on the clinical impact of artificial intelligence applications. We aimed to evaluate timestamp-based radiological dictation time, introduce timestamp modeling techniques, and compare those with prospective measured reporting. Dictation time was calculated from RIS timestamps between 05/2010 and 01/2021 at our institution (n = 108,310). We minimized contextual outliers by simulating the raw data by iteration (1000, vector size (µ/sd/λ) = 100/loop), assuming normally distributed reporting times. In addition, 329 reporting times were prospectively measured by two radiologists (1 and 4 years of experience). Altogether, 106,127 of 108,310 exams were included after simulation, with a mean dictation time of 16.62 min. Mean dictation time was 16.05 min head CT (44,743/45,596), 15.84 min for chest CT (32,797/33,381), 17.92 min for abdominal CT (n = 22,805/23,483), 10.96 min for CT foot (n = 937/958), 9.14 min for lumbar spine (881/892), 8.83 min for shoulder (409/436), 8.83 min for CT wrist (1201/1322), and 39.20 min for a polytrauma patient (2127/2242), without a significant difference to the prospective reporting times. In conclusion, timestamp analysis is useful to measure current reporting practice, whereas body-region and radiological experience are confounders. This could aid in cost–benefit assessments of workflow changes (e.g., AI implementation). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9394242 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93942422022-08-23 Time Is Money: Considerations for Measuring the Radiological Reading Time Sexauer, Raphael Bestler, Caroline J Imaging Article Timestamps in the Radiology Information System (RIS) are a readily available and valuable source of information with increasing significance, among others, due to the current focus on the clinical impact of artificial intelligence applications. We aimed to evaluate timestamp-based radiological dictation time, introduce timestamp modeling techniques, and compare those with prospective measured reporting. Dictation time was calculated from RIS timestamps between 05/2010 and 01/2021 at our institution (n = 108,310). We minimized contextual outliers by simulating the raw data by iteration (1000, vector size (µ/sd/λ) = 100/loop), assuming normally distributed reporting times. In addition, 329 reporting times were prospectively measured by two radiologists (1 and 4 years of experience). Altogether, 106,127 of 108,310 exams were included after simulation, with a mean dictation time of 16.62 min. Mean dictation time was 16.05 min head CT (44,743/45,596), 15.84 min for chest CT (32,797/33,381), 17.92 min for abdominal CT (n = 22,805/23,483), 10.96 min for CT foot (n = 937/958), 9.14 min for lumbar spine (881/892), 8.83 min for shoulder (409/436), 8.83 min for CT wrist (1201/1322), and 39.20 min for a polytrauma patient (2127/2242), without a significant difference to the prospective reporting times. In conclusion, timestamp analysis is useful to measure current reporting practice, whereas body-region and radiological experience are confounders. This could aid in cost–benefit assessments of workflow changes (e.g., AI implementation). MDPI 2022-07-24 /pmc/articles/PMC9394242/ /pubmed/35893086 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jimaging8080208 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Sexauer, Raphael Bestler, Caroline Time Is Money: Considerations for Measuring the Radiological Reading Time |
title | Time Is Money: Considerations for Measuring the Radiological Reading Time |
title_full | Time Is Money: Considerations for Measuring the Radiological Reading Time |
title_fullStr | Time Is Money: Considerations for Measuring the Radiological Reading Time |
title_full_unstemmed | Time Is Money: Considerations for Measuring the Radiological Reading Time |
title_short | Time Is Money: Considerations for Measuring the Radiological Reading Time |
title_sort | time is money: considerations for measuring the radiological reading time |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9394242/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35893086 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jimaging8080208 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sexauerraphael timeismoneyconsiderationsformeasuringtheradiologicalreadingtime AT bestlercaroline timeismoneyconsiderationsformeasuringtheradiologicalreadingtime |