Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Pediatric Radiology 4/2021

01-04-2021 | Musculoskeletal Radiology | MINISYMPOSIUM: SPECIALIST PEDIATRIC RADIOLOGY — DOES IT ADD VALUE?

Providing second-opinion interpretations of pediatric imaging: embracing the call for value-added medicine

Authors: Marla B. K. Sammer, J. Herman Kan

Published in: Pediatric Radiology | Issue 4/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

The value of obtaining second-opinion interpretations by specialty radiologists has been established. In pediatric radiology, this has primarily been explored in general terms, comparing tertiary pediatric radiologists’ interpretations to referral reads. In adults, second reads by subspecialty radiologists have been shown to yield changes in patient management, including in neuroradiology, musculoskeletal radiology and oncological radiology. Here, we examine second-opinion reads by pediatric radiologists by reviewing the pediatric and adult subspecialty literature. We also present our experience in providing subspecialty outside reads, summarizing lessons learned in implementing a system for outside interpretations into a pediatric radiology practice.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Berlin L (2002) Malpractice issues in radiology: curbstone consultation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 178:1353–1359CrossRef Berlin L (2002) Malpractice issues in radiology: curbstone consultation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 178:1353–1359CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Institute of Medicine (U.S.) Committee on the Learning Health Care System in America (2013) Best care at lower cost: the path to continuously learning health care in America. National Academies Press, Washington, DC Institute of Medicine (U.S.) Committee on the Learning Health Care System in America (2013) Best care at lower cost: the path to continuously learning health care in America. National Academies Press, Washington, DC
3.
go back to reference Eakins C, Ellis WD, Pruthi S et al (2012) Second opinion interpretations by specialty radiologists at a pediatric hospital: rate of disagreement and clinical implications. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199:916–920CrossRef Eakins C, Ellis WD, Pruthi S et al (2012) Second opinion interpretations by specialty radiologists at a pediatric hospital: rate of disagreement and clinical implications. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199:916–920CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Karmazyn B, Wanner MR, Marine MB et al (2019) The added value of a second read by pediatric radiologists for outside skeletal surveys. Pediatr Radiol 49:203–209CrossRef Karmazyn B, Wanner MR, Marine MB et al (2019) The added value of a second read by pediatric radiologists for outside skeletal surveys. Pediatr Radiol 49:203–209CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Hatzoglou V, Omuro AM, Haque S et al (2016) Second-opinion interpretations of neuroimaging studies by oncologic neuroradiologists can help reduce errors in cancer care. Cancer 122:2708–2714CrossRef Hatzoglou V, Omuro AM, Haque S et al (2016) Second-opinion interpretations of neuroimaging studies by oncologic neuroradiologists can help reduce errors in cancer care. Cancer 122:2708–2714CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Chalian M, Del Grande F, Thakkar RS et al (2016) Second-opinion subspecialty consultations in musculoskeletal radiology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 206:1217–1221CrossRef Chalian M, Del Grande F, Thakkar RS et al (2016) Second-opinion subspecialty consultations in musculoskeletal radiology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 206:1217–1221CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Robinson JD, Linnau KF, Hippe DS et al (2018) Accuracy of outside radiologists’ reports of computed tomography exams of emergently transferred patients. Emerg Radiol 25:169–173CrossRef Robinson JD, Linnau KF, Hippe DS et al (2018) Accuracy of outside radiologists’ reports of computed tomography exams of emergently transferred patients. Emerg Radiol 25:169–173CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Loughrey GJ, Carrington BM, Anderson H et al (1999) The value of specialist oncological radiology review of cross-sectional imaging. Clin Radiol 54:149–154CrossRef Loughrey GJ, Carrington BM, Anderson H et al (1999) The value of specialist oncological radiology review of cross-sectional imaging. Clin Radiol 54:149–154CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Carter BW, Erasmus JJ, Truong MT et al (2017) Quality and value of subspecialty reinterpretation of thoracic CT scans of patients referred to a tertiary cancer center. J Am Coll Radiol 14:1109–1118CrossRef Carter BW, Erasmus JJ, Truong MT et al (2017) Quality and value of subspecialty reinterpretation of thoracic CT scans of patients referred to a tertiary cancer center. J Am Coll Radiol 14:1109–1118CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Zan E, Yousem DM, Carone M, Lewin JS (2010) Second-opinion consultations in neuroradiology. Radiology 255:135–141CrossRef Zan E, Yousem DM, Carone M, Lewin JS (2010) Second-opinion consultations in neuroradiology. Radiology 255:135–141CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Lysack JT, Hoy M, Hudon ME et al (2013) Impact of neuroradiologist second opinion on staging and management of head and neck cancer. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 42:1–7CrossRef Lysack JT, Hoy M, Hudon ME et al (2013) Impact of neuroradiologist second opinion on staging and management of head and neck cancer. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 42:1–7CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Lu MT, Tellis WM, Avrin DE (2013) Providing formal reports for outside imaging and the rate of repeat imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 203:107–110CrossRef Lu MT, Tellis WM, Avrin DE (2013) Providing formal reports for outside imaging and the rate of repeat imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 203:107–110CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Rosenkrantz AB, Glover M, Kang SK et al (2018) Volume and coverage of secondary imaging interpretation under Medicare, 2003 to 2016. J Am Coll Radiol 15:1394–1400CrossRef Rosenkrantz AB, Glover M, Kang SK et al (2018) Volume and coverage of secondary imaging interpretation under Medicare, 2003 to 2016. J Am Coll Radiol 15:1394–1400CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Shaikh S, Bafana R, Halabi SS (2016) Concierge and second-opinion radiology: review of practices. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 45:111–114CrossRef Shaikh S, Bafana R, Halabi SS (2016) Concierge and second-opinion radiology: review of practices. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 45:111–114CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Duszak R (2005) Another unpaid second opinion. J Am Coll Radiol 2:793–794CrossRef Duszak R (2005) Another unpaid second opinion. J Am Coll Radiol 2:793–794CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Bender CE, Bansal S, Wolfman D, Parikh JR (2019) 2018 ACR Commission on human resources workforce survey. J Am Coll Radiol 16:508–512CrossRef Bender CE, Bansal S, Wolfman D, Parikh JR (2019) 2018 ACR Commission on human resources workforce survey. J Am Coll Radiol 16:508–512CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Providing second-opinion interpretations of pediatric imaging: embracing the call for value-added medicine
Authors
Marla B. K. Sammer
J. Herman Kan
Publication date
01-04-2021
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Pediatric Radiology / Issue 4/2021
Print ISSN: 0301-0449
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1998
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-019-04596-x

Other articles of this Issue 4/2021

Pediatric Radiology 4/2021 Go to the issue

Minisymposium: Specialist Pediatric Radiology — Does it add value?

Pediatric radiology as a subspecialty in Nigeria: to be or not to be?

Minisymposium: Specialist Pediatric Radiology — Does it add value?

Pediatric radiology crossing continents

Minisymposium: Specialist Pediatric Radiology — Does it add value?

Sustainability of paediatric radiology in Italy