{"title":"常见肌肉骨骼 MRI 检查的读取时间:调查研究。","authors":"Robert M Kwee, Asaad A H Amasha, Thomas C Kwee","doi":"10.3390/tomography10090112","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The workload of musculoskeletal radiologists has come under pressure. Our objective was to estimate the reading times of common musculoskeletal MRI examinations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 144 radiologists were asked to estimate reading times (including interpretation and reporting) for MRI of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, hip, knee, and ankle. Multivariate linear regression analyses were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Reported median reading times with interquartile range (IQR) for the shoulder, elbow, wrist, hip, knee, and ankle were 10 (IQR 6-14), 10 (IQR 6-14), 11 (IQR 7.5-14.5), 10 (IQR 6.6-13.4), 8 (IQR 4.6-11.4), and 10 (IQR 6.5-13.5) min, respectively. Radiologists aged 35-44 years reported shorter reading times for the shoulder (β coefficient [β] = B-3.412, <i>p</i> = 0.041), hip (β = -3.596, <i>p</i> = 0.023), and knee (β = -3.541, <i>p</i> = 0.013) than radiologists aged 45-54 years. Radiologists not working in an academic/teaching hospital reported shorter reading times for the hip (β = -3.611, <i>p</i> = 0.025) and knee (β = -3.038, <i>p</i> = 0.035). Female radiologists indicated longer reading times for all joints (β of 2.592 to 5.186, <i>p</i> ≤ 0.034). Radiologists without musculoskeletal fellowship training indicated longer reading times for the shoulder (β = 4.604, <i>p</i> = 0.005), elbow (β = 3.989, <i>p</i> = 0.038), wrist (β = 4.543, <i>p</i> = 0.014), and hip (β = 2.380, <i>p</i> = 0.119). Radiologists with <5 years of post-residency experience indicated longer reading times for all joints (β of 5.355 to 6.984, <i>p</i> ≤ 0.045), and radiologists with 5-10 years of post-residency experience reported longer reading time for the knee (β = 3.660, <i>p</i> = 0.045) than those with >10 years of post-residency experience.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is substantial variation among radiologists in reported reading times for common musculoskeletal MRI examinations. Several radiologist-related determinants appear to be associated with reading speed, including age, gender, hospital type, training, and experience.</p>","PeriodicalId":51330,"journal":{"name":"Tomography","volume":"10 9","pages":"1527-1533"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11435788/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reading Times of Common Musculoskeletal MRI Examinations: A Survey Study.\",\"authors\":\"Robert M Kwee, Asaad A H Amasha, Thomas C Kwee\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/tomography10090112\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The workload of musculoskeletal radiologists has come under pressure. Our objective was to estimate the reading times of common musculoskeletal MRI examinations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 144 radiologists were asked to estimate reading times (including interpretation and reporting) for MRI of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, hip, knee, and ankle. Multivariate linear regression analyses were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Reported median reading times with interquartile range (IQR) for the shoulder, elbow, wrist, hip, knee, and ankle were 10 (IQR 6-14), 10 (IQR 6-14), 11 (IQR 7.5-14.5), 10 (IQR 6.6-13.4), 8 (IQR 4.6-11.4), and 10 (IQR 6.5-13.5) min, respectively. Radiologists aged 35-44 years reported shorter reading times for the shoulder (β coefficient [β] = B-3.412, <i>p</i> = 0.041), hip (β = -3.596, <i>p</i> = 0.023), and knee (β = -3.541, <i>p</i> = 0.013) than radiologists aged 45-54 years. Radiologists not working in an academic/teaching hospital reported shorter reading times for the hip (β = -3.611, <i>p</i> = 0.025) and knee (β = -3.038, <i>p</i> = 0.035). Female radiologists indicated longer reading times for all joints (β of 2.592 to 5.186, <i>p</i> ≤ 0.034). Radiologists without musculoskeletal fellowship training indicated longer reading times for the shoulder (β = 4.604, <i>p</i> = 0.005), elbow (β = 3.989, <i>p</i> = 0.038), wrist (β = 4.543, <i>p</i> = 0.014), and hip (β = 2.380, <i>p</i> = 0.119). Radiologists with <5 years of post-residency experience indicated longer reading times for all joints (β of 5.355 to 6.984, <i>p</i> ≤ 0.045), and radiologists with 5-10 years of post-residency experience reported longer reading time for the knee (β = 3.660, <i>p</i> = 0.045) than those with >10 years of post-residency experience.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is substantial variation among radiologists in reported reading times for common musculoskeletal MRI examinations. Several radiologist-related determinants appear to be associated with reading speed, including age, gender, hospital type, training, and experience.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51330,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Tomography\",\"volume\":\"10 9\",\"pages\":\"1527-1533\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11435788/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Tomography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/tomography10090112\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tomography","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/tomography10090112","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Reading Times of Common Musculoskeletal MRI Examinations: A Survey Study.
Background: The workload of musculoskeletal radiologists has come under pressure. Our objective was to estimate the reading times of common musculoskeletal MRI examinations.
Methods: A total of 144 radiologists were asked to estimate reading times (including interpretation and reporting) for MRI of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, hip, knee, and ankle. Multivariate linear regression analyses were performed.
Results: Reported median reading times with interquartile range (IQR) for the shoulder, elbow, wrist, hip, knee, and ankle were 10 (IQR 6-14), 10 (IQR 6-14), 11 (IQR 7.5-14.5), 10 (IQR 6.6-13.4), 8 (IQR 4.6-11.4), and 10 (IQR 6.5-13.5) min, respectively. Radiologists aged 35-44 years reported shorter reading times for the shoulder (β coefficient [β] = B-3.412, p = 0.041), hip (β = -3.596, p = 0.023), and knee (β = -3.541, p = 0.013) than radiologists aged 45-54 years. Radiologists not working in an academic/teaching hospital reported shorter reading times for the hip (β = -3.611, p = 0.025) and knee (β = -3.038, p = 0.035). Female radiologists indicated longer reading times for all joints (β of 2.592 to 5.186, p ≤ 0.034). Radiologists without musculoskeletal fellowship training indicated longer reading times for the shoulder (β = 4.604, p = 0.005), elbow (β = 3.989, p = 0.038), wrist (β = 4.543, p = 0.014), and hip (β = 2.380, p = 0.119). Radiologists with <5 years of post-residency experience indicated longer reading times for all joints (β of 5.355 to 6.984, p ≤ 0.045), and radiologists with 5-10 years of post-residency experience reported longer reading time for the knee (β = 3.660, p = 0.045) than those with >10 years of post-residency experience.
Conclusions: There is substantial variation among radiologists in reported reading times for common musculoskeletal MRI examinations. Several radiologist-related determinants appear to be associated with reading speed, including age, gender, hospital type, training, and experience.
TomographyMedicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
10.50%
发文量
222
期刊介绍:
TomographyTM publishes basic (technical and pre-clinical) and clinical scientific articles which involve the advancement of imaging technologies. Tomography encompasses studies that use single or multiple imaging modalities including for example CT, US, PET, SPECT, MR and hyperpolarization technologies, as well as optical modalities (i.e. bioluminescence, photoacoustic, endomicroscopy, fiber optic imaging and optical computed tomography) in basic sciences, engineering, preclinical and clinical medicine.
Tomography also welcomes studies involving exploration and refinement of contrast mechanisms and image-derived metrics within and across modalities toward the development of novel imaging probes for image-based feedback and intervention. The use of imaging in biology and medicine provides unparalleled opportunities to noninvasively interrogate tissues to obtain real-time dynamic and quantitative information required for diagnosis and response to interventions and to follow evolving pathological conditions. As multi-modal studies and the complexities of imaging technologies themselves are ever increasing to provide advanced information to scientists and clinicians.
Tomography provides a unique publication venue allowing investigators the opportunity to more precisely communicate integrated findings related to the diverse and heterogeneous features associated with underlying anatomical, physiological, functional, metabolic and molecular genetic activities of normal and diseased tissue. Thus Tomography publishes peer-reviewed articles which involve the broad use of imaging of any tissue and disease type including both preclinical and clinical investigations. In addition, hardware/software along with chemical and molecular probe advances are welcome as they are deemed to significantly contribute towards the long-term goal of improving the overall impact of imaging on scientific and clinical discovery.