批准者、反对者和挣扎者:直肠癌磁共振成像形式使用的q-方法学研究。

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Sarah Alderson, Chand Muthoo, Hannah Rossington, Phil Quirke, Damian Tolan
{"title":"批准者、反对者和挣扎者:直肠癌磁共振成像形式使用的q-方法学研究。","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

目的:直肠癌磁共振成像(rcMRI)允许准确分期和指导直肠癌的治疗决策。报告的完整性存在差异,但模板形式报告可以显著增加关键肿瘤描述符的包含。我们的目的是确定与实施形式报告障碍有关的放射科医生的社会共享观点。测量相对于其他放射科医生意见的主观性将允许识别防止实施的常见模式。方法:邀请来自16家医院信托的胃肠道放射科专家进行q-方法学研究。参与者按照正态分布(q-grid)对56个关于使用形式报告(q-set)的障碍的陈述进行排名。进行因素分析以确定独立账户,并使用额外的调查数据来支持解释。结果:27名放射科医师参与;11例(41%)有超过10年的rcmri报告。放射科医生对形式使用的态度有三种不同的说法:赞成者、反对者和挣扎的拥护者。排名最高的障碍与形式形式、放射科医生个人的偏好和对疗效的信念以及与更广泛的多学科团队和卫生系统级实施相关的因素有关。结论:不赞成形式证明的放射科医师不太可能使用形式证明,除非存在外部影响,例如治疗临床医生的要求。增加内部和组织支持也会增加使用。侧重于这些障碍的有针对性的实施战略有可能增加对类似干预措施的采用。知识的进步:专业放射科医生需要一个多层次的自适应实施策略,针对形式特征以及个人和组织障碍量身定制,以增加直肠癌MRI的形式报告,以支持准确的治疗决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Approvers, disapprovers and strugglers: A q-methodology study of rectal cancer magnetic resonance imaging proforma use.

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
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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