Improving radiologic communication in oncology: a single-centre experience with structured reporting for cancer patients.
Improving radiologic communication in oncology: a single-centre experience with structured reporting for cancer patients.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s13244-020-00907-1
复制
发表时间：
2020-09-29
影响因子：
4.7
通讯作者：
Berger AK
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Weber TF;Spurny M;Hasse FC;Sedlaczek O;Haag GM;Springfeld C;Mokry T;Jäger D;Kauczor HU;Berger AK
我们的目的是开发一种结构化报告概念(结构化肿瘤学报告，SOR)，用于在临床常规中对癌症患者进行一般随访评估。此外，我们分析了SOR的报告质量与参考肿瘤学家评估的传统报告(CR)的质量。SOR的设计目的是使用统一的术语提供标准化的布局、列表的肿瘤负担文件和标准化的结论。编制了一个用于报告的软件应用程序，以确保布局和词汇的一致性，并便利使用SOR。由6名内科肿瘤学家对25份SOR和25份CR的报告质量进行了回顾性分析，使用7分量表(1分代表最好的分数)，针对6个问卷项目，涉及报告质量和总体满意度的不同要素。≤ 评分为3分，为阳性评分。在全面实施后的第一年，报告了使用SOR进行的7471次影像检查。在几个月内，SOR在所有肿瘤学报告中的比例从49%上升到95%。每个问卷项目的报告质量分数均高于SOR(p<；各0.001)。所有问卷条目平均得分：SOR为1.98±1.22，CR为3.05±1.93(p<；0.001)。总体满意度SOR为2.15±1.32，CR为3.39±2.0 8(p<；0.001)。SOR的正面评级比例较高(89%对67%；P<；0.001)。使用专门的软件应用程序，为评估抗癌治疗效果而进行的后续成像的全部门结构化报告是可行的。对于结构化报告，肿瘤专科医生对报告质量的满意度更高。
Our aim was to develop a structured reporting concept (structured oncology report, SOR) for general follow-up assessment of cancer patients in clinical routine. Furthermore, we analysed the report quality of SOR compared to conventional reports (CR) as assessed by referring oncologists. SOR was designed to provide standardised layout, tabulated tumour burden documentation and standardised conclusion using uniform terminology. A software application for reporting was programmed to ensure consistency of layout and vocabulary and to facilitate utilisation of SOR. Report quality was analysed for 25 SOR and 25 CR retrospectively by 6 medical oncologists using a 7-point scale (score 1 representing the best score) for 6 questionnaire items addressing different elements of report quality and overall satisfaction. A score of ≤ 3 was defined as a positive rating. In the first year after full implementation, 7471 imaging examinations were reported using SOR. The proportion of SOR in relation to all oncology reports increased from 49 to 95% within a few months. Report quality scores were better for SOR for each questionnaire item (p < 0.001 each). Averaged over all questionnaire item scores were 1.98 ± 1.22 for SOR and 3.05 ± 1.93 for CR (p < 0.001). The overall satisfaction score was 2.15 ± 1.32 for SOR and 3.39 ± 2.08 for CR (p < 0.001). The proportion of positive ratings was higher for SOR (89% versus 67%; p < 0.001). Department-wide structured reporting for follow-up imaging performed for assessment of anticancer treatment efficacy is feasible using a dedicated software application. Satisfaction of referring oncologist with report quality is superior for structured reports.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
8.4
作者：
Eisenhauer, E. A.;Therasse, P.;Verweij, J.
通讯作者：
Verweij, J.
影响因子：
19.7
作者：
Al-Hawary, Mahmoud M.;Francis, Isaac R.;Simeone, Diane M.
通讯作者：
Simeone, Diane M.
影响因子：
5
作者：
Naik, SS;Hanbidge, A;Wilson, SR
通讯作者：
Wilson, SR
影响因子：
4.5
作者：
Flusberg, Milana;Ganeles, Jeremy;Chernyak, Victoria
通讯作者：
Chernyak, Victoria
影响因子：
1.4
作者：
Goldberg-Stein, Shlomit;Walter, William R.;Scheinfeld, Meir H.
通讯作者：
Scheinfeld, Meir H.