Survey of radiologists and emergency department providers after implementation of a global radiology report categorization system.

Abstract

Breakdown in communication of important imaging results threatens patient safety and risks malpractice claims. To facilitate closed-loop communication, our institution developed a unique radiology report categorization (RADCAT) system employing automated alert notification systems. This study aimed to understand users' initial experiences with the RADCAT system and obtain feedback. Web-based surveys were distributed to radiologists and emergency department (ED) providers at our hospital system within 1year of institution-wide RADCAT implementation. Survey designs differed based on clinical setting. Most prompts utilized declarative statements with 5-point agreement Likert scales. Closed-response data was analyzed with descriptive statistics. Response rates among radiologists and ED providers were 59.4% (63/106) and 38.4% (69/211), respectively. 78.0% (46/59) of radiologists and 60.9% (42/69) of ED providers agreed that RADCAT improves patient care. Of radiologists, 84.1% (53/63) agreed that RADCAT design is intuitive, and 57.6% (34/59) agreed that RADCAT improves efficiency. Of ED providers, 69.6% (48/69) agreed that RADCAT appropriately differentiates urgent and non-urgent findings, and 65.2% (45/69) agreed that auto-population of discharge documents with imaging results containing follow-up recommendations protects them from liability. Only 35.6% (21/59) of radiologists and 21.7% (15/69) of ED providers agreed that RADCAT implementation decreased reading room visits by ordering providers. Open-response feedback showed that some ED providers find RADCAT too complex while some radiologists desire improved transparency regarding imaging study communication status. Since its implementation, RADCAT has been well received among radiologists and ED providers with agreement that it improves patient care and effectively distinguishes and communicates important imaging findings.