Jada Hislop MD , Jasmine Locklin MD , Chris Ho MD , Elizabeth A. Krupinski PhD , Charnaye R. Bosley , Timothy Arleo MD , Nadja Kadom MD
{"title":"质量改进项目:以患者为中心的乳腺成像字母。","authors":"Jada Hislop MD , Jasmine Locklin MD , Chris Ho MD , Elizabeth A. Krupinski PhD , Charnaye R. Bosley , Timothy Arleo MD , Nadja Kadom MD","doi":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.04.015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Assess patient-centered revisions to our institution’s screening mammography letters for BIRADS-0 and BIRADS-0 dense breast employing existing validated readability and usability rating instruments.</div></div><div><h3>Methods/approach</h3><div>Cross-sectional analysis of two different mammography recall letters used by our institution revised to be patient-centered: the mammography recall letter (BIRADS 0) and the recall letter for patients with dense breasts (BIRADS 0-DB). During the editorial stage, we used chat GPT v3.5 and the Flesch-Kincaid grade level (FKGL). After updates to the layout and addition of visuals, the letters were rated by professional subject-matter experts (SME) for understandability and actionability using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT). The letters were then evaluated by patients for comprehensibility, utility, and design using the Consumer Information Rating Form (CIRF). Descriptive statistics were calculated for each assessment.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Baseline BI-RADS 0 and BI-RADS 0-DB letter FKGL levels were 11.9 and 10.7, respectively; after iterative revision the FKGL were 6.7 and 5.8, respectively. PEMAT ratings for understandability for the BI-RADS 0 recall letter improved from 41 to 90 % after the revision, and for actionability improved from 50 to 88 %. The understandability for the revised BI-RADS 0-DB letter improved from 46 to 85 % and actionability improved from 44 to 73 %. CIRF ratings indicated significant value for the added images in the BIRADS-0-DB letter.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Use of validated and established assessment tools confirmed that our new breast imaging letters were improved in terms of readability, understandability/comprehensibility, actionability, utility, and design. The process now serves as a pipeline for future revisions to documents that our department is sharing with patients</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51617,"journal":{"name":"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology","volume":"54 5","pages":"Pages 608-615"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quality improvement project: Patient-centered breast imaging letters\",\"authors\":\"Jada Hislop MD , Jasmine Locklin MD , Chris Ho MD , Elizabeth A. Krupinski PhD , Charnaye R. Bosley , Timothy Arleo MD , Nadja Kadom MD\",\"doi\":\"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.04.015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Assess patient-centered revisions to our institution’s screening mammography letters for BIRADS-0 and BIRADS-0 dense breast employing existing validated readability and usability rating instruments.</div></div><div><h3>Methods/approach</h3><div>Cross-sectional analysis of two different mammography recall letters used by our institution revised to be patient-centered: the mammography recall letter (BIRADS 0) and the recall letter for patients with dense breasts (BIRADS 0-DB). During the editorial stage, we used chat GPT v3.5 and the Flesch-Kincaid grade level (FKGL). After updates to the layout and addition of visuals, the letters were rated by professional subject-matter experts (SME) for understandability and actionability using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT). The letters were then evaluated by patients for comprehensibility, utility, and design using the Consumer Information Rating Form (CIRF). Descriptive statistics were calculated for each assessment.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Baseline BI-RADS 0 and BI-RADS 0-DB letter FKGL levels were 11.9 and 10.7, respectively; after iterative revision the FKGL were 6.7 and 5.8, respectively. PEMAT ratings for understandability for the BI-RADS 0 recall letter improved from 41 to 90 % after the revision, and for actionability improved from 50 to 88 %. The understandability for the revised BI-RADS 0-DB letter improved from 46 to 85 % and actionability improved from 44 to 73 %. CIRF ratings indicated significant value for the added images in the BIRADS-0-DB letter.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Use of validated and established assessment tools confirmed that our new breast imaging letters were improved in terms of readability, understandability/comprehensibility, actionability, utility, and design. The process now serves as a pipeline for future revisions to documents that our department is sharing with patients</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51617,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology\",\"volume\":\"54 5\",\"pages\":\"Pages 608-615\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0363018825000842\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"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":"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0363018825000842","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Quality improvement project: Patient-centered breast imaging letters
Purpose
Assess patient-centered revisions to our institution’s screening mammography letters for BIRADS-0 and BIRADS-0 dense breast employing existing validated readability and usability rating instruments.
Methods/approach
Cross-sectional analysis of two different mammography recall letters used by our institution revised to be patient-centered: the mammography recall letter (BIRADS 0) and the recall letter for patients with dense breasts (BIRADS 0-DB). During the editorial stage, we used chat GPT v3.5 and the Flesch-Kincaid grade level (FKGL). After updates to the layout and addition of visuals, the letters were rated by professional subject-matter experts (SME) for understandability and actionability using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT). The letters were then evaluated by patients for comprehensibility, utility, and design using the Consumer Information Rating Form (CIRF). Descriptive statistics were calculated for each assessment.
Results
Baseline BI-RADS 0 and BI-RADS 0-DB letter FKGL levels were 11.9 and 10.7, respectively; after iterative revision the FKGL were 6.7 and 5.8, respectively. PEMAT ratings for understandability for the BI-RADS 0 recall letter improved from 41 to 90 % after the revision, and for actionability improved from 50 to 88 %. The understandability for the revised BI-RADS 0-DB letter improved from 46 to 85 % and actionability improved from 44 to 73 %. CIRF ratings indicated significant value for the added images in the BIRADS-0-DB letter.
Conclusion
Use of validated and established assessment tools confirmed that our new breast imaging letters were improved in terms of readability, understandability/comprehensibility, actionability, utility, and design. The process now serves as a pipeline for future revisions to documents that our department is sharing with patients
期刊介绍:
Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology covers important and controversial topics in radiology. Each issue presents important viewpoints from leading radiologists. High-quality reproductions of radiographs, CT scans, MR images, and sonograms clearly depict what is being described in each article. Also included are valuable updates relevant to other areas of practice, such as medical-legal issues or archiving systems. With new multi-topic format and image-intensive style, Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology offers an outstanding, time-saving investigation into current topics most relevant to radiologists.