Approvers, disapprovers and strugglers: A q-methodology study of rectal cancer magnetic resonance imaging proforma use.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Sarah Alderson, Chand Muthoo, Hannah Rossington, Phil Quirke, Damian Tolan
{"title":"Approvers, disapprovers and strugglers: A q-methodology study of rectal cancer magnetic resonance imaging proforma use.","authors":"Sarah Alderson, Chand Muthoo, Hannah Rossington, Phil Quirke, Damian Tolan","doi":"10.1093/bjr/tqaf035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Rectal cancer Magnetic Resonance Imaging (rcMRI) allows accurate staging and informs treatment decisions in rectal cancer. There is variability in reporting completeness, however template proforma reports can significantly increase the inclusion of key tumour descriptors. We aimed to identify socially shared viewpoints of radiologists relating to barriers to implementing proforma reporting. Measuring the subjectivity of opinions relative to other radiologists will allow identification of common patterns preventing implementation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Specialist gastrointestinal radiologists from 16 hospital trusts were invited to a q-methodology study. Participants ranked 56 statements on barriers to using proforma reports (the q-set) in a normal distribution (q-grid). Factor analyses were undertaken to identify independent accounts, and additional survey data were used to support interpretation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-seven radiologists participated; 11 (41%) had more than 10 years reporting rcMRIs. Three distinct accounts of radiologist attitudes to proforma-use were identified: Approvers, Disprovers and Struggling champions. The highest ranked barriers related to proforma format, individual radiologists' preferences and beliefs about efficacy and factors relating to wider multidisciplinary teams and health system-level implementation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Radiologists that disapprove of proformas are unlikely to use them unless external influences are applied, such as a requirement by treating clinicians. Increased internal and organisational support would also increase use. Targeted implementation strategies focusing on these barriers has the potential to increase uptake of similar interventions.</p><p><strong>Advances in knowledge: </strong>Specialist Radiologists require a multi-level adaptive implementation strategy, tailored to proforma characteristics as well as individual and organisational barriers to increase proforma reporting for rectal cancer MRI to support accurate treatment decision making.</p>","PeriodicalId":9306,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjr/tqaf035","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Rectal cancer Magnetic Resonance Imaging (rcMRI) allows accurate staging and informs treatment decisions in rectal cancer. There is variability in reporting completeness, however template proforma reports can significantly increase the inclusion of key tumour descriptors. We aimed to identify socially shared viewpoints of radiologists relating to barriers to implementing proforma reporting. Measuring the subjectivity of opinions relative to other radiologists will allow identification of common patterns preventing implementation.

Methods: Specialist gastrointestinal radiologists from 16 hospital trusts were invited to a q-methodology study. Participants ranked 56 statements on barriers to using proforma reports (the q-set) in a normal distribution (q-grid). Factor analyses were undertaken to identify independent accounts, and additional survey data were used to support interpretation.

Results: Twenty-seven radiologists participated; 11 (41%) had more than 10 years reporting rcMRIs. Three distinct accounts of radiologist attitudes to proforma-use were identified: Approvers, Disprovers and Struggling champions. The highest ranked barriers related to proforma format, individual radiologists' preferences and beliefs about efficacy and factors relating to wider multidisciplinary teams and health system-level implementation.

Conclusions: Radiologists that disapprove of proformas are unlikely to use them unless external influences are applied, such as a requirement by treating clinicians. Increased internal and organisational support would also increase use. Targeted implementation strategies focusing on these barriers has the potential to increase uptake of similar interventions.

Advances in knowledge: Specialist Radiologists require a multi-level adaptive implementation strategy, tailored to proforma characteristics as well as individual and organisational barriers to increase proforma reporting for rectal cancer MRI to support accurate treatment decision making.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
British Journal of Radiology
British Journal of Radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.80%
发文量
330
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: BJR is the international research journal of the British Institute of Radiology and is the oldest scientific journal in the field of radiology and related sciences. Dating back to 1896, BJR’s history is radiology’s history, and the journal has featured some landmark papers such as the first description of Computed Tomography "Computerized transverse axial tomography" by Godfrey Hounsfield in 1973. A valuable historical resource, the complete BJR archive has been digitized from 1896. Quick Facts: - 2015 Impact Factor – 1.840 - Receipt to first decision – average of 6 weeks - Acceptance to online publication – average of 3 weeks - ISSN: 0007-1285 - eISSN: 1748-880X Open Access option
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信