Impact of a Reading Priority Scoring System on the Prioritization of Examination Interpretations

被引:9
|
作者
Gaskin, Cree M. [1 ]
Patrie, James T. [2 ]
Hanshew, Michael D. [1 ]
Boatman, Dustin M. [1 ]
McWey, Ryan P. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Virginia Hlth Syst, Dept Radiol & Med Imaging, Box 800170, Charlottesville, VA 22908 USA
[2] Univ Virginia Hlth Syst, Dept Hlth Evaluat Sci, Charlottesville, VA 22908 USA
关键词
prioritization; read priority; reading priority; report turnaround time; stat; TIME; STAT;
D O I
10.2214/AJR.15.14837
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE. Our institution implemented a read priority scoring system to combat the known limitations of traditional methods for the prioritization of examination interpretations by radiologists. We aimed to determine the impact on report turnaround time (RTAT) and RTAT variability. MATERIALS AND METHODS. On examination completion, technologists entered a read priority score (1-9) using provided definitions. We retrospectively reviewed the median RTAT and RTAT variability (i.e., interquartile range length) for radiology examinations (n = 615,541; 2011-2014). We used Spearman correlation coefficients to determine the relationships between read priority scores and the median RTAT and the RTAT variability by year. We compared median RTAT and RTAT variability between early (2011) versus late (20122014) adoption phases using distribution-free random permutation tests. RESULTS. Ranked correlations showed yearly improvement, leading to a near-perfect ranking of median RTAT (r = 0.98, p < 0.001) and a perfect ranking of RTAT variability (r = 1.00, p < 0.001) by nine levels of priority. Eight of the nine priority levels showed a reduction in median RTAT between the early and late phases, and the three most urgent levels-that is, 1, 2, and 3-improved by 23%, 5%, and 70% (all, p < 0.001), respectively. Only one priority level (4, defined as outpatient urgent [8% of studies]) showed significant worsening by 15% (p < 0.001). The three most urgent levels of priority also showed improvements in RTAT variability (61%, 17%, 71%, respectively; all, p < 0.01). Only the lowest level of priority (9) exhibited a significant worsening in RTAT variability by 9% (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION. A reading priority scoring system with defined clinical scenarios yielded desirable prioritization of examination interpretations by radiologists as evidenced by appropriate and improved stratification of RTATs and RTAT variability.
引用
收藏
页码:1031 / 1039
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Does the Priority Scoring System for Joint Replacement really identify those in most need?
    Coleman, Brendan
    McChesney, Stephen
    Twaddle, Bruce
    NEW ZEALAND MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2005, 118 (1215)
  • [22] Real-time priority scoring system must be used for prioritisation on waiting lists
    Davis, B
    Johnson, SR
    BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1999, 318 (7199): : 1699 - 1699
  • [23] DOUBLE READING IN SCREENING MAMMOGRAPHY - ITS VARIABLE IMPACT ON THE ACCURACY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF SINGLE INTERPRETATIONS
    BEAM, CA
    LAYDE, PM
    SULLIVAN, DC
    RADIOLOGY, 1995, 197 : 274 - 274
  • [24] A Study on Online-Scoring-System-Based Educational Examination and Measurement
    Yuan, Deling
    Xiao, Guang
    Chu, Huiling
    ADVANCES IN COMPUTER SCIENCE, ENVIRONMENT, ECOINFORMATICS, AND EDUCATION, PT 5, 2011, 218 : 123 - +
  • [25] Research on Expert System of Automatic Scoring for Computer Basic Course Examination
    Zhang, Jie
    Feng, Junhong
    ADVANCES IN COMPUTER SCIENCE, ENVIRONMENT, ECOINFORMATICS, AND EDUCATION, PT 5, 2011, 218 : 154 - 159
  • [26] Impact of alien plants in Turkey assessed by the Generic Impact Scoring System
    Yazlik, Ayse
    Pergl, Jan
    Pysek, Petr
    NEOBIOTA, 2018, (39) : 31 - 51
  • [27] The Impact of an Online Transition Curriculum on Secondary Student Reading: A Multilevel Examination
    Lombardi, Allison R.
    Izzo, Margo V.
    Rifenbark, Graham G.
    Murray, Alexa
    Buck, Andrew
    Monahan, Jessica
    Gelbar, Nicholas
    CAREER DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSITION FOR EXCEPTIONAL INDIVIDUALS, 2017, 40 (01) : 15 - 24
  • [28] Examination Of Landing Error Scoring System Scores For Division 1 Basketball Players
    Smith, Jessica
    Coffey, Timothy G.
    MEDICINE & SCIENCE IN SPORTS & EXERCISE, 2020, 52 (07) : 267 - 268
  • [29] An examination of interrater reliability for scoring the Rorschach comprehensive system in eight data sets
    Meyer, GJ
    Hilsenroth, MJ
    Baxter, D
    Exner, JE
    Fowler, JC
    Piers, CC
    Resnick, J
    JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT, 2002, 78 (02) : 219 - 274
  • [30] Diabetic neuropathy examination - A hierarchical scoring system to diagnose distal polyneuropathy in diabetes
    Meijer, JWG
    van Sonderen, E
    Blaauwwiekel, EE
    Smit, AJ
    Groothoff, JW
    Eisma, WH
    Links, TP
    DIABETES CARE, 2000, 23 (06) : 750 - 753