In this issue, Vosshenrich et al. (
1) describe their efforts to quantify the effects of adopting structured reporting (SR) templates in a Neuroradiology training environment. Specifically, the authors measured pre- and postimplementation differences in report turnaround time (TAT) and on the extent of faculty-required proofreading changes. Following the introduction of SR templates, the authors noted shorter time-to-preliminary and decreased time-to-final reporting measures, concluding that improved report similarity between resident preliminary and final reports likely contributed to the decreased TATs.
- Vosshenrich J
- Brantner P
- Cyriac J
- et al.
Quantifying the effects of structured reporting on report turnaround times and proofreading workload in neuroradiology.
Acad Radiol. 2022; (Epub ahead of print)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2022.05.011
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
One-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:Subscribe to Academic Radiology
Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
- Quantifying the effects of structured reporting on report turnaround times and proofreading workload in neuroradiology.Acad Radiol. 2022; (Epub ahead of print)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2022.05.011
- Improving consistency in radiology reporting through the use of department-wide standardized structured reporting.Radiology. 2013; 267 (Epub 2013 Jan 17): 240-250https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12121502
- Structured reporting in radiology.Acad Radiol. 2018; 25 (Epub 2017 Oct 10): 66-73https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2017.08.005
- Structured reporting in radiology: a systematic review to explore its potential.Eur Radiol. 2022; 32 (Epub 2021 Oct 15): 2837-2854https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-08327-5
- Revealing the most common reporting errors through data mining of the report proofreading process.Eur Radiol. 2021; 31 (Epub 2020 Sep 30): 2115-2125https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07306-6
- Journal Club: Structured radiology reports are more complete and more effective than unstructured reports.AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014; 203: 1265-1271https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.14.12636
- Recall of structured radiology reports is significantly superior to that of unstructured reports.Br J Radiol. 2018; 91 (Epub 2018 Jan 5)20170670https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20170670
- Quantifying radiology resident fatigue: analysis of preliminary reports.Radiology. 2021; 298 (Epub 2021 Jan 26): 632-639https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2021203486
- Preliminary radiology report discordances and patient outcomes.J Am Coll Radiol. 2020; 17 (Epub 2020 Aug 5): 1621-1625https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2019.12.033
- Effect of radiology study flow on report turnaround time.AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017; 209 (Epub 2017 Oct 5): 1308-1311https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.17.18282
- Radiologist productivity analytics: factors impacting abdominal pelvic CT exam reporting times.J Digit Imaging. 2022; 35 (Epub 2022 Jan 10): 87-97https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-021-00548-w
- Structured reports and radiology residents: friends or foes?.Acad Radiol. 2022; 29 (Epub 2020 Nov 5): S43-S47https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2020.10.014
Published online: March 07, 2023
Accepted: February 14, 2023
Received: February 13, 2023
Publication stageIn Press Corrected Proof
© 2023 The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.