Impact of Artificial Intelligence Triage on Radiologist Report Turnaround Time: Real-World Time Savings and Insights From Model Predictions.

Yee Lam Elim Thompson, Jonathan Fergus, Jonathan Chung, Jana G Delfino, Weijie Chen, Gary M Levine, Frank W Samuelson
{"title":"Impact of Artificial Intelligence Triage on Radiologist Report Turnaround Time: Real-World Time Savings and Insights From Model Predictions.","authors":"Yee Lam Elim Thompson, Jonathan Fergus, Jonathan Chung, Jana G Delfino, Weijie Chen, Gary M Levine, Frank W Samuelson","doi":"10.1016/j.jacr.2025.07.033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To quantify the impact of workflow parameters on time savings in report turnaround time due to an AI triage device that prioritized pulmonary embolism (PE) in chest CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) examinations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study analyzed 11,252 adult CTPA examinations conducted for suspected PE at a single tertiary academic medical center. Data was divided into two periods: pre-artificial intelligence (AI) and post-AI. For PE-positive examinations, turnaround time (TAT)-defined as the duration from patient scan completion to the first preliminary report completion-was compared between the two periods. Time savings were reported separately for work-hour and off-hour cohorts. To characterize radiologist workflow, 527,234 records were retrieved from the PACS and workflow parameters such as examination interarrival time and radiologist read time extracted. These parameters were input into a computational model to predict time savings after deployment of an AI triage device and to study the impact of workflow parameters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The pre-AI dataset included 4,694 chest CTPA examinations with 13.3% being PE-positive. The post-AI dataset comprised 6,558 examinations with 16.2% being PE-positive. The mean TAT for pre-AI and post-AI during work hours are 68.9 (95% confidence interval 55.0-82.8) and 46.7 (38.1-55.2) min, respectively, and those during off-hours are 44.8 (33.7-55.9) and 42.0 (33.6-50.3) min. Clinically observed time savings during work hours (22.2 [95% confidence interval: 5.85-38.6] min) were significant (P = .004), while off-hour (2.82 [-11.1 to 16.7] min) were not (P = .345). Observed time savings aligned with model predictions (29.6 [95% range: 23.2-38.1] min for work hours; 2.10 [1.76, 2.58] min for off-hours).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Consideration and quantification of the clinical workflow contributes to the accurate assessment of the expected time savings in report TAT after deployment of an AI triage device.</p>","PeriodicalId":73968,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2025.07.033","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To quantify the impact of workflow parameters on time savings in report turnaround time due to an AI triage device that prioritized pulmonary embolism (PE) in chest CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) examinations.

Methods: This retrospective study analyzed 11,252 adult CTPA examinations conducted for suspected PE at a single tertiary academic medical center. Data was divided into two periods: pre-artificial intelligence (AI) and post-AI. For PE-positive examinations, turnaround time (TAT)-defined as the duration from patient scan completion to the first preliminary report completion-was compared between the two periods. Time savings were reported separately for work-hour and off-hour cohorts. To characterize radiologist workflow, 527,234 records were retrieved from the PACS and workflow parameters such as examination interarrival time and radiologist read time extracted. These parameters were input into a computational model to predict time savings after deployment of an AI triage device and to study the impact of workflow parameters.

Results: The pre-AI dataset included 4,694 chest CTPA examinations with 13.3% being PE-positive. The post-AI dataset comprised 6,558 examinations with 16.2% being PE-positive. The mean TAT for pre-AI and post-AI during work hours are 68.9 (95% confidence interval 55.0-82.8) and 46.7 (38.1-55.2) min, respectively, and those during off-hours are 44.8 (33.7-55.9) and 42.0 (33.6-50.3) min. Clinically observed time savings during work hours (22.2 [95% confidence interval: 5.85-38.6] min) were significant (P = .004), while off-hour (2.82 [-11.1 to 16.7] min) were not (P = .345). Observed time savings aligned with model predictions (29.6 [95% range: 23.2-38.1] min for work hours; 2.10 [1.76, 2.58] min for off-hours).

Discussion: Consideration and quantification of the clinical workflow contributes to the accurate assessment of the expected time savings in report TAT after deployment of an AI triage device.

人工智能分类对放射科医生报告周转时间的影响:现实世界的时间节省和模型预测的见解。
目的:量化人工智能分诊设备在胸部CT肺血管造影(CTPA)检查中优先考虑肺栓塞(PE)后,工作流程参数对报告周转时间节省的影响。方法:本回顾性研究分析了在单一三级学术医疗中心进行的11,252例疑似PE的成人CTPA检查。数据分为前人工智能(AI)和后人工智能两个阶段。对于pe阳性检查,周转时间(TAT)-定义为从患者扫描完成到首次初步报告完成的持续时间-在两个时间段之间进行比较。节省的时间分别报告了工作时间组和非工作时间组。为了描述放射科医生的工作流程,从PACS中检索了527,234条记录,并提取了诸如检查间隔时间和放射科医生阅读时间等工作流程参数。这些参数被输入到计算模型中,以预测部署人工智能分诊设备后节省的时间,并研究工作流程参数的影响。结果:ai前数据集包括4,694例胸部CTPA检查,其中13.3%为pe阳性。后ai数据集包括6558次检查,其中16.2%为pe阳性。人工智能前和人工智能后的平均TAT在工作时间分别为68.9(95%可信区间为55.0-82.8)和46.7 (38.1-55.2)min,非工作时间分别为44.8(33.7-55.9)和42.0 (33.6-50.3)min。临床观察工作时间节约时间(22.2[95%可信区间:5.85-38.6]min)有统计学意义(P = 0.004),非工作时间节约时间(2.82 [-11.1 ~ 16.7]min)无统计学意义(P = .345)。观察到的时间节省与模型预测一致(工作时间为29.6[95%范围:23.2-38.1]分钟;非工作时间为2.10[1.76,2.58]分钟)。讨论:临床工作流程的考虑和量化有助于准确评估部署人工智能分诊设备后报告TAT预期节省的时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信