Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 10/2017

01-10-2017 | Magnetic Resonance

Structured reporting of MRI of the shoulder – improvement of report quality?

Authors: Sebastian Gassenmaier, Marco Armbruster, Florian Haasters, Tobias Helfen, Thomas Henzler, Sedat Alibek, Dominik Pförringer, Wieland H. Sommer, Nora N. Sommer

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 10/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate the effect of structured reports (SRs) in comparison to non-structured narrative free text (NRs) shoulder MRI reports and potential effects of both types of reporting on completeness, readability, linguistic quality and referring surgeons’ satisfaction.

Methods

Thirty patients after trauma or with suspected degenerative changes of the shoulder were included in this study (2012–2015). All patients underwent shoulder MRI for further assessment and possible surgical planning. NRs were generated during clinical routine. Corresponding SRs were created using a dedicated template. All 60 reports were evaluated by two experienced orthopaedic shoulder surgeons using a questionnaire that included eight questions.

Results

Eighty per cent of the SRs were fully complete without any missing key features whereas only 45% of the NRs were fully complete (p < 0.001). The extraction of information was regarded to be easy in 92% of the SRs and 63% of the NRs. The overall quality of the SRs was rated better than that of the NRs (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Structured reporting of shoulder MRI improves the readability as well as the linguistic quality of radiological reports, and potentially leads to a higher satisfaction of referring physicians.

Key Points

• Structured MRI reports of the shoulder improve readability.
• Structured reporting facilitates information extraction.
• Referring physicians prefer structured reports to narrative free text reports.
• Structured MRI reports of the shoulder can reduce radiologist re-consultations.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Sinitsyn VE, Komarova MA, Mershina EA (2014) Radiology report: past, present and future. Vestn Rentgenol Radiol 3:35–40
2.
Sierra AE, Bisesi MA, Rosenbaum TL, Potchen EJ (1992) Readability of the radiologic report. Investig Radiol 27:236–239CrossRef
3.
Soekhoe JK, Groenen MJ, van Ginneken AM et al (2007) Computerized endoscopic reporting is no more time-consuming than reporting with conventional methods. Eur J Intern Med 18:321–325CrossRefPubMed
4.
Douglas PS, Hendel RC, Cummings JE et al (2009) ACCF/ACR/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HRS/NASCI/RSNA/SAIP/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR 2008 Health policy statement on structured reporting in cardiovascular imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 53:76–90CrossRefPubMed
5.
6.
Sobel JL, Pearson ML, Gross K et al (1996) Information content and clarity of radiologists' reports for chest radiography. Acad Radiol 3:709–717CrossRefPubMed
7.
Khorasani R, Bates DW, Teeger S, Rothschild JM, Adams DF, Seltzer SE (2003) Is terminology used effectively to convey diagnostic certainty in radiology reports? Acad Radiol 10:685–688CrossRefPubMed
8.
9.
Naik SS, Hanbidge A, Wilson SR (2001) Radiology reports: examining radiologist and clinician preferences regarding style and content. AJR Am J Roentgenol 176:591–598CrossRefPubMed
10.
Bosmans JM, Weyler JJ, De Schepper AM, Parizel PM (2011) The radiology report as seen by radiologists and referring clinicians: results of the COVER and ROVER surveys. Radiology 259:184–195CrossRefPubMed
11.
Bosmans JM, Peremans L, Menni M, De Schepper AM, Duyck PO, Parizel PM (2012) Structured reporting: if, why, when, how-and at what expense? Results of a focus group meeting of radiology professionals from eight countries. Insights Imaging 3:295–302CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
Johnson AJ, Chen MY, Swan JS, Applegate KE, Littenberg B (2009) Cohort study of structured reporting compared with conventional dictation. Radiology 253:74–80CrossRefPubMed
13.
Brook OR, Brook A, Vollmer CM, Kent TS, Sanchez N, Pedrosa I (2015) Structured reporting of multiphasic CT for pancreatic cancer: potential effect on staging and surgical planning. Radiology 274:464–472CrossRefPubMed
14.
Schwartz LH, Panicek DM, Berk AR, Li Y, Hricak H (2011) Improving communication of diagnostic radiology findings through structured reporting. Radiology 260:174–181CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Larson DB, Towbin AJ, Pryor RM, Donnelly LF (2013) Improving consistency in radiology reporting through the use of department-wide standardized structured reporting. Radiology 267:240–250CrossRefPubMed
16.
Bosmans JM, Neri E, Ratib O, Kahn CE Jr (2015) Structured reporting: a fusion reactor hungry for fuel. Insights Imaging 6:129–132CrossRefPubMed
17.
Browning T (2014) The process of structured reporting: adding value and quality. In: Chhabra A, Soldatos T (eds) Musculoskeletal MRI structured evaluation: how to practically fill the reporting checklist. Wolters Kluwer, Philadelphia
18.
Ellman H (1990) Diagnosis and treatment of incomplete rotator cuff tears. Clin Orthop Relat Res 64–74
19.
Zanetti M, Gerber C, Hodler J (1998) Quantitative assessment of the muscles of the rotator cuff with magnetic resonance imaging. Investig Radiol 33:163–170CrossRef
20.
Thomazeau H, Rolland Y, Lucas C, Duval JM, Langlais F (1996) Atrophy of the supraspinatus belly. Assessment by MRI in 55 patients with rotator cuff pathology. Acta Orthop Scand 67:264–268CrossRefPubMed
21.
Goutallier D, Postel JM, Bernageau J, Lavau L, Voisin MC (1994) Fatty muscle degeneration in cuff ruptures. Pre- and postoperative evaluation by CT scan. Clin Orthop Relat Res 78–83
22.
Bateman J (1972) The shoulder and neck. In: Saunders W (ed) The shoulder and neck. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 213–235
23.
Davidson J, Burkhart SS (2010) The geometric classification of rotator cuff tears: a system linking tear pattern to treatment and prognosis. Arthroscopy 26:417–424CrossRefPubMed
24.
Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174CrossRefPubMed
25.
Plumb AA, Grieve FM, Khan SH (2009) Survey of hospital clinicians' preferences regarding the format of radiology reports. Clin Radiol 64:386–394; 395–386
26.
27.
Weiss DL, Langlotz CP (2008) Structured reporting: patient care enhancement or productivity nightmare? Radiology 249:739–747CrossRefPubMed
28.
Marcovici PA, Taylor GA (2014) Journal club: structured radiology reports are more complete and more effective than unstructured reports. AJR Am J Roentgenol 203:1265–1271CrossRefPubMed
29.
Kahn CE Jr, Langlotz CP, Burnside ES et al (2009) Toward best practices in radiology reporting. Radiology 252:852–856CrossRefPubMed
30.
Sistrom CL, Honeyman-Buck J (2005) Free text versus structured format: information transfer efficiency of radiology reports. AJR Am J Roentgenol 185:804–812CrossRefPubMed
31.
Hawkins CM, Hall S, Hardin J, Salisbury S, Towbin AJ (2012) Prepopulated radiology report templates: a prospective analysis of error rate and turnaround time. J Digit Imaging 25:504–511CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
32.
Hawkins CM, Hall S, Zhang B, Towbin AJ (2014) Creation and implementation of department-wide structured reports: an analysis of the impact on error rate in radiology reports. J Digit Imaging 27:581–587CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
33.
34.
Powell DK, Silberzweig JE (2015) State of structured reporting in radiology, a survey. Acad Radiol 22:226–233CrossRefPubMed
35.
Lin E, Powell DK, Kagetsu NJ (2014) Efficacy of a checklist-style structured radiology reporting template in reducing resident misses on cervical spine computed tomography examinations. J Digit Imaging 27:588–593CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
36.
Johnson AJ (2012) All structured reporting systems are not created equal. Radiology 262:726, author reply 726-727
37.
38.
D’Orsi CJSE, Mendelson EB, Morris EA et al (2013) ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. American College of Radiology, Reston
39.
40.
Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL et al (2016) PI-RADS Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System: 2015, version 2. Eur Urol 69:16–40CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Structured reporting of MRI of the shoulder – improvement of report quality?
Authors
Sebastian Gassenmaier
Marco Armbruster
Florian Haasters
Tobias Helfen
Thomas Henzler
Sedat Alibek
Dominik Pförringer
Wieland H. Sommer
Nora N. Sommer
Publication date
01-10-2017
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 10/2017
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-4778-z

Other articles of this Issue 10/2017

European Radiology 10/2017 Go to the issue

Chest

CT and histopathologic characteristics of lung adenocarcinoma with pure ground-glass nodules 10 mm or less in diameter

Neuro

Arterial spin labeling-based Z-maps have high specificity and positive predictive value for neurodegenerative dementia compared to FDG-PET

Magnetic Resonance

Comparison of spin-echo echoplanar imaging and gradient recalled echo-based MR elastography at 3 Tesla with and without gadoxetic acid administration

Computer Applications

Radiomic features from the peritumoral brain parenchyma on treatment-naïve multi-parametric MR imaging predict long versus short-term survival in glioblastoma multiforme: Preliminary findings

Computed Tomography

CT perfusion imaging of the liver and the spleen in patients with cirrhosis: Is there a correlation between perfusion and portal venous hypertension?

Hepatobiliary-Pancreas

Added value of gadoxetic acid-enhanced T1-weighted magnetic resonance cholangiography for the diagnosis of post-transplant biliary complications