{"title":"The current quality criteria of MRI reports distributed to healthcare stakeholders in Jordan","authors":"Mohammad Ayasrah","doi":"10.1108/ijhrh-06-2021-0132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nMany international radiology societies, including American College of Radiologists (ACR), have established guidelines for optimum forms and contents of medical imaging reports to ensure high quality and to guarantee the satisfaction of both the referring physician and the patient. Therefore, this study aims to analyze the criteria of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reports in Jordan according to the standards of the ACR.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis cross-sectional study was conducted in early January 2021 for two weeks. An invitation letter was sent to 85 MRI centers of various health-care sectors in Jordan to participate in the study. Each invitee was requested to send at least ten different MRI reports. The study used a questionnaire containing the checklist of the latest edition 2020 of ACR’s practice parameter to communicate the diagnostic imaging results and the demographic information of the participating MRI centers. Seven basic elements were assessed for content-related quality of MRI reports, which are administrative data, patient demographics, clinical history, imaging procedures, clinical symptoms, imaging observations and impressions. Statistical analyses were used to evaluate the data.\n\n\nFindings\nForty-one MRI centers participated in the study with 386 different MRI exam reports. The majority (92%) of the reports were computer-generated. Free texted unstructured reports and head-structured reports had an almost equal percentage of around 40%. Exam and radiologist demography as well as exam findings criteria were 100% available in all reports. The percentage of exam conclusion, and exam description and techniques were 2% and 4.9%, respectively (N = 368). There was a positive association between computer-generated reports and the presence of picture archiving and communication systems (PACS)/health information systems r = 0.443.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nStructured and free text unstructured reporting were the common types of MRI exam reports in Jordan. Handwriting exam reporting existed in few MRI centers, particularly in those that had no PACS and radiology information systems.\n","PeriodicalId":14129,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Human Rights in Healthcare","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Human Rights in Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijhrh-06-2021-0132","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
Many international radiology societies, including American College of Radiologists (ACR), have established guidelines for optimum forms and contents of medical imaging reports to ensure high quality and to guarantee the satisfaction of both the referring physician and the patient. Therefore, this study aims to analyze the criteria of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reports in Jordan according to the standards of the ACR.
Design/methodology/approach
This cross-sectional study was conducted in early January 2021 for two weeks. An invitation letter was sent to 85 MRI centers of various health-care sectors in Jordan to participate in the study. Each invitee was requested to send at least ten different MRI reports. The study used a questionnaire containing the checklist of the latest edition 2020 of ACR’s practice parameter to communicate the diagnostic imaging results and the demographic information of the participating MRI centers. Seven basic elements were assessed for content-related quality of MRI reports, which are administrative data, patient demographics, clinical history, imaging procedures, clinical symptoms, imaging observations and impressions. Statistical analyses were used to evaluate the data.
Findings
Forty-one MRI centers participated in the study with 386 different MRI exam reports. The majority (92%) of the reports were computer-generated. Free texted unstructured reports and head-structured reports had an almost equal percentage of around 40%. Exam and radiologist demography as well as exam findings criteria were 100% available in all reports. The percentage of exam conclusion, and exam description and techniques were 2% and 4.9%, respectively (N = 368). There was a positive association between computer-generated reports and the presence of picture archiving and communication systems (PACS)/health information systems r = 0.443.
Originality/value
Structured and free text unstructured reporting were the common types of MRI exam reports in Jordan. Handwriting exam reporting existed in few MRI centers, particularly in those that had no PACS and radiology information systems.
期刊介绍:
nternational Journal of Human Rights in Healthcare (IJHRH) is an international, peer reviewed journal with a unique practical approach to promoting race equality, inclusion and human rights in health and social care. The journal publishes scholarly and double blind peer-reviewed papers of the highest standard, including case studies and book reviews. IJHRH aims include: -To explore what is currently known about discrimination and disadvantage with a particular focus on health and social care -Push the barriers of the human rights discourse by identifying new avenues for healthcare practice and policy internationally -Create bridges between policymakers, practitioners and researchers -Identify and understand the social determinants of health equity and practical interventions to overcome barriers at national and international levels. The journal welcomes papers which use varied approaches, including discussion of theory, comparative studies, systematic evaluation of interventions, analysis of qualitative data and study of health and social care institutions and the political process. Papers published in IJHRH: -Clearly demonstrate the implications of the research -Provide evidence-rich information -Provoke reflection and support critical analysis of both challenges and strengths -Share examples of best practice and ‘what works’, including user perspectives IJHRH is a hugely valuable source of information for researchers, academics, students, practitioners, managers, policy-makers, commissioning bodies, social workers, psychologists, nurses, voluntary sector workers, service users and carers internationally.