Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology最新文献

{"title":"Effects of patient survey feedback on improving patient experience with outpatient magnetic resonance imaging","authors":"Evie Nguyen ,&nbsp;Christopher A. Dodoo MS ,&nbsp;Imon Banerjee PhD ,&nbsp;Fatima Al-Khafaji MBChB ,&nbsp;Jacob A. Varner ,&nbsp;Iridian Jaramillo MS ,&nbsp;Meghana Nadella MS ,&nbsp;Tyler M. Kuo ,&nbsp;Zoe Deahl ,&nbsp;Dyan G. DeYoung ,&nbsp;Nelly Tan MD","doi":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2024.10.035","DOIUrl":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2024.10.035","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>We examined the feasibility of collecting timely patient feedback after outpatient magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and the effect of radiology staff responses or actions on patient experience scores.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This study included 6043 patients who completed a feedback survey via email after undergoing outpatient MRI at a tertiary care medical center between April 2021 and September 2022. The survey consisted of the question “How was your radiology visit?” with a 5-point emoji-Likert scale, an open-text feedback box, and an option to request a response. The primary outcome measure analyzed was the “top box” score (ie, the percentage of 5/5 scores) reflecting overall patient satisfaction. For comparison, Press Ganey quarterly top box scores from a separate group of patients who underwent outpatient MRI concurrent with the study period were also analyzed. Patient-reported feedback was categorized by using natural language processing and analyzed along with radiology staff responses and actions.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The top box score for “How was your radiology visit?” increased from 81.1% during the first month of the study to 86.1% during the last month. Similarly, the comparative Press Ganey top box scores for questions related to “radiology staff concern for comfort” and “courtesy of radiology technologist” increased from the first quarter to the last quarter of the study. Patients reported service excellence in 59.2% of surveys (<em>n</em>=3576), long wait time in 6.3% (<em>n</em>=383), and poor communication in 6.1% (<em>n</em>=369). Some praise from patients was shared with staff members who interacted with the patients. Of all survey responses, 5.5% required radiology staff responses or actions, such as sharing feedback with supervisors, providing direct feedback to staff, and making telephone calls to patients. From the first half to the second half of the study, the median (IQR) wait time decreased from 46 (32–66) minutes to 45 (31–64) minutes (<em>P</em>=.02), and the percentage of patients who reported long wait time decreased from 7.4% to 5.4% (<em>P</em>=.002).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Our study highlights the feasibility of obtaining timely patient feedback after outpatient MRI and using it to improve patient experience. These results may contribute to the development of more patient-centered care in the field of radiology.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51617,"journal":{"name":"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology","volume":"54 3","pages":"Pages 369-376"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143817172","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Bilateral internal carotid dissection: advocating for the use of the “googly eyes sign’’","authors":"Nikolaos-Achilleas Arkoudis MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Georgios Velonakis MD, PhD","doi":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.04.001","DOIUrl":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.04.001","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51617,"journal":{"name":"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology","volume":"54 4","pages":"Pages 526-527"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144038648","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Radiological insights into pediatric undernutrition: Early detection, complications, and a structured evaluation approach","authors":"Ishan Kumar MBBS, MD, DNB ,&nbsp;Ashish Verma MBBS, DNB, PhD ,&nbsp;Priyanka Aggarwal MBBS, MD ,&nbsp;Nidhi Yadav MBBS, MD ,&nbsp;Karan Kukreja MBBS, MD ,&nbsp;Pramod Kumar Singh MBBS, MD","doi":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.03.002","DOIUrl":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.03.002","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Despite a decade of significant growth in economic conditions of South Asian countries, people continue to suffer from the pervading problem of malnutrition. High prevalence of child undernutrition despite unprecedented economic growth in these nations have a multifactorial etiology including fetal malnutrition and status of women, inadequate feeding practices in infant and young child, poor household sanitation and untargeted health schemes. The diagnosis and management of malnutrition and its various complications require a multidisciplinary approach and radiologists have a potentially important, albeit currently underutilized, role in early detection, identifying the other clinical mimics such as endocrinal and genetic disorders, and detection of key complications. In this review, we apprise the radiological aspects of PEM and micro-nutritional deficiency and their complications. We also provide a comprehensive structured evaluation scheme for evaluation of a suspected malnourished child.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51617,"journal":{"name":"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology","volume":"54 5","pages":"Pages 616-626"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143702547","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Diagnostic impact of DWI absence on prostate lesion assessment using PI-RADS 2.1","authors":"Negar Firoozeh MD ,&nbsp;Sung Yoon Park MD ,&nbsp;Yaw Nyame MD ,&nbsp;Arash Mahdavi MD ,&nbsp;Seyed Ali Nabipoorashrafi MD ,&nbsp;Achille Mileto MD ,&nbsp;Bahar Mansoori MD ,&nbsp;Antonio C Westphalen MD, PhD","doi":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.03.001","DOIUrl":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.03.001","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To compare Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scores derived from a standard multiparametric prostate MRI (mpMRI) protocol with those from a protocol consisting only of T2-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced images (T2+DCE MRI).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>In this retrospective, single-center, cross-sectional study approved by the IRB and compliant with HIPAA, 492 MRI exams performed in 2022 were analyzed. PI-RADS scores from mpMRIs were extracted from medical records, and new scores were generated for T2+DCE MRI following PI-RADS guidelines. Score differences were evaluated using Wilcoxon signed-rank and McNemar's tests, stratified by lesion location (peripheral zone, PZ, and transition zone, TZ). Diagnostic accuracies of the two methods were compared using ROC curves, and logistic regression was employed to identify predictors of score changes.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Notable differences in PI-RADS scores were observed were observed in the PZ (<em>P</em> = 0.03) and TZ (<em>P</em> &lt; 0.001). 4.8 % of PZ and 4.0 % of TZ PI-RADS 3-5 lesions were misclassified as PI-RADS 1-2 on T2W+DCE MRI (PZ vs TZ, <em>P</em> = 0.64). However, ROC curve analyses revealed no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy between mpMRI (Az = 0.77) and T2+DCE MRI (Az = 0.75, <em>P</em> = 0.07). PSA density was identified as a predictor of score changes from PI-RADS 3-5 to 1-2, although the effect size was modest.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Although T2+DCE MRI yields different PI-RADS scores compared to mpMRI, the clinical impact on diagnostic accuracy and decision-making is overall small. This supports the continued use of T2+DCE MRI, particularly when diffusion-weighted imaging is compromised.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51617,"journal":{"name":"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology","volume":"54 5","pages":"Pages 596-602"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143607567","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Differentiating between GPT-generated and human-written feedback for radiology residents","authors":"Zier Zhou ,&nbsp;Arsalan Rizwan ,&nbsp;Nick Rogoza ,&nbsp;Andrew D Chung ,&nbsp;Benjamin YM Kwan","doi":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.02.002","DOIUrl":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.02.002","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Recent competency-based medical education (CBME) implementation within Canadian radiology programs has required faculty to conduct more assessments. The rise of narrative feedback in CBME, coinciding with the rise of large language models (LLMs), raises questions about the potential of these models to generate informative comments matching human experts and associated challenges. This study compares human-written feedback to GPT-3.5-generated feedback for radiology residents, and how well raters can differentiate between these sources.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Assessments were completed by 28 faculty members for 10 residents within a Canadian Diagnostic Radiology program (2019–2023). Comments were extracted from Elentra, de-identified, and parsed into sentences, of which 110 were randomly selected for analysis. 11 of these comments were entered into GPT-3.5, generating 110 synthetic comments that were mixed with actual comments. Two faculty raters and GPT-3.5 read each comment to predict whether it was human-written or GPT-generated.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Actual comments from humans were often longer and more specific than synthetic comments, especially when describing clinical procedures and patient interactions. Source differentiation was more difficult when both feedback types were similarly vague. Low agreement (<em>k</em>=-0.237) between responses provided by GPT-3.5 and humans was observed. Human raters were also more accurate (80.5 %) at identifying actual and synthetic comments than GPT-3.5 (50 %).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Currently, GPT-3.5 cannot match human experts in delivering specific, nuanced feedback for radiology residents. Compared to humans, GPT-3.5 also performs worse in distinguishing between actual and synthetic comments. These insights could guide the development of more sophisticated algorithms to produce higher-quality feedback, supporting faculty development.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51617,"journal":{"name":"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology","volume":"54 5","pages":"Pages 574-578"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143473241","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Personnel wellness: Creating the next blue zone in radiology","authors":"Cody R. Johnson MD,&nbsp;Syed Muhammad Awais Bukhari MD,&nbsp;Amit Gupta MD","doi":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.01.005","DOIUrl":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.01.005","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Personnel wellness in professional environments is often perceived as a secondary concern wherein efficiency and productivity are prioritized. The Blue Zones philosophy challenges this traditional approach. We propose implementing consistent wellness practices that are based on the Blue Zones principles and believe that these will primarily benefit providers and organizations as a whole. By fostering an environment where all interactions and activities nurture the collective, we can reimagine wellness as an integral part of professional life.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51617,"journal":{"name":"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology","volume":"54 4","pages":"Pages 440-442"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143371412","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Reimbursement for outside second opinion imaging interpretation: Experience at a quaternary care academic pediatric health system","authors":"Victor J. Seghers M.D.Ph.D. ,&nbsp;Margaret A. Clement ,&nbsp;Robert C. Orth M.D.Ph.D. ,&nbsp;Marla B.K. Sammer M.D. ,&nbsp;Andrew C. Sher M.D.","doi":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.01.002","DOIUrl":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.01.002","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>There are increasing requests and benefits of providing formal written reports for second opinions of outside imaging in part due to medical legal concerns supporting appropriate documentation and concerns that misunderstandings from verbal curbside consults on the part of the requesting physician may lead to suboptimal patient care and potential liability for the radiologist and hospital. Verbal communication of findings on outside imaging is thus often considered insufficient with recommendations from undocumented consultations less likely to be acted upon. The increased work associated with performance of second-opinion interpretations may be substantial, raising concern that if curbside consults are not properly compensated, some second opinion interpretations may be performed more expeditiously than primary interpretations due to their more direct impact upon the daily work load, income, and relative value units. Since 2016, our quaternary-care academic pediatric hospital system has provided and billed for formal second-opinion imaging interpretations upon request for MRI, CT, and Nuclear Medicine exams, and disallowed the process of informal curbside consultations on such studies. This study aims to offer insight into our second opinion interpretation workflows and our experience in obtaining reimbursement for pediatric second opinion interpretations. Our findings indicate a formal second-opinion interpretation program can be financially viable and may help offset the additional resources required, and can serve as a guide to inform other departments attempting to establish a similar process.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51617,"journal":{"name":"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology","volume":"54 5","pages":"Pages 590-595"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143367063","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Take your PIC (Program Improvement Committee): The benefits of a resident-run initiative to improve graduate medical education","authors":"Samantha Pfiffner B.S. ,&nbsp;Michael Burcescu M.D. ,&nbsp;Arif Musa M.D. ,&nbsp;Hamed Kordbacheh M.D. ,&nbsp;Alhassan Alhasson M.D. ,&nbsp;Gulcin Altinok M.D. ,&nbsp;Lisa Dillon Ph.D. ,&nbsp;Ali Harb M.D.","doi":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.01.011","DOIUrl":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.01.011","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The evolving landscape of graduate medical education (GME) necessitates innovative approaches to residency program evaluation and improvement. At Detroit Medical Center/Wayne State University, a novel resident-led Program Improvement Committee (PIC) was established in June 2022 within the Diagnostic Radiology Residency Program. The PIC serves as a flexible, resident-driven structure designed to enhance engagement, provide continuous feedback, and implement actionable solutions in collaboration with residency leadership. Unlike traditional Program Evaluation Committees (PECs) and Clinical Competency Committees (CCCs), the PIC promotes a more democratized approach, empowering residents to take ownership of their training. By convening monthly and fostering fluid subcommittees, the PIC has successfully driven initiatives including increased research engagement, mentorship programs, social media enhancement, and system-level improvements such as the establishment of a dedicated WiFi network for hospital employees. The PIC represents a paradigm shift in residency enhancement, offering a responsive, adaptable mechanism for fostering innovation, inclusivity, and collaboration. Further research is needed to evaluate its broader impact, but the PIC has the potential to revolutionize residency training and improve medical education.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51617,"journal":{"name":"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology","volume":"54 5","pages":"Pages 546-549"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143061663","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Management options for vascular anomalies in the distal extremities","authors":"Chase Mahler BS ,&nbsp;Emily Gullette MD ,&nbsp;Jake DiFatta BS ,&nbsp;Rachel Oser MD FSIR ,&nbsp;Junaid Raja MD MSPH FACP","doi":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.01.013","DOIUrl":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.01.013","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Vascular anomalies arise during embryologic development due to errors in vasculogenesis. They are associated with sporadic or inherited mutations in receptors, growth factors or enzymes within various vasculogenic pathways such as mTOR, VEGF, and PI3K. Vascular anomalies have the capability to cause significant symptoms and disability, especially when located in the distal extremities. These symptoms often include local pain, swelling, and decreased range of motion and functionality of the affected area.</div><div>This article intends to provide a concise overview of vascular anomalies in the distal extremities and their treatment options. The categorization of the vascular anomalies, key clinical features, diagnostic approaches, and potential significance of when they occur in the extremities and how that makes them unique are discussed. An overview of the six major management options used to treat vascular anomalies in general is reviewed in the context of vascular anomalies in the extremities, including observation, pharmacotherapy, sclerotherapy, embolization, cryoablation, and surgery. Each section discusses the role of the treatment approach and associated benefits and risks.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51617,"journal":{"name":"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology","volume":"54 4","pages":"Pages 506-512"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143070134","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A retrospective analysis of medical student authorship in highest impact radiology journal publications","authors":"Aiman Shahid BSc ,&nbsp;Rooshi Parikh BSc ,&nbsp;Muhammad Ebrahim Shahid ,&nbsp;Aleena Malik BSc ,&nbsp;Sonali Sharma BSc ,&nbsp;Faisal Khosa MD MBA","doi":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.01.007","DOIUrl":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.01.007","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>To assess medical student authorship in radiology research, focusing on the prevalence and impact of student articles, demographic trends, and potential barriers and opportunities for involvement.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We retrospectively assessed original research and review papers from 2018 to 2022 in the top five radiology journals based on their 2022 Impact Factor. Three reviewers manually validated and classified articles by medical student (MS) and non-MS authorship. Data collected included publication and authorship metrics. Thematic analysis of articles was performed from keywords and SCOPUS topic clusters. Significant associations were identified using chi-squared and two-tailed z-tests.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of the 2533 publications from all five journals, only 0.47 % were MS-authored, of which 83.3 % had a Field Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) &gt; 1. Of the 19 MS authors, 68.42 % had prior publications, with the same proportion holding prior first authorship. Female students averaged a higher FWCI (2.47 ± 2.31) but comprised only 26.32 % of all students. Only 16.67 % of MS articles had a female senior author (SA). This was consistent in non-MS articles, with females representing 19.9 % to 25.2 % of SAs across all journals. Of the 2521 non-MS articles, 92 % were classified into themes, revealing that 47.89 % of publications primarily focused on machine learning, while another 42.26 % incorporated some machine learning concepts.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Compared to non-medical student publications in radiology, those by medical students were disproportionately limited but impactful. Both demographic and academic factors hinder student engagement in publishing. Hence promoting, supporting, and sponsoring student involvement in research is pivotal for the discipline.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51617,"journal":{"name":"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology","volume":"54 4","pages":"Pages 433-439"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143061466","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}