Search

Movement disorders and neurodegenerative diseases are a variety of conditions that involve progressive neuronal degeneration, injury, or death. Establishing the correct diagnosis of a movement disorder or neurodegenerative process can be difficult due to the variable features of these conditions, unusual clinical presentations, and overlapping symptoms and characteristics. MRI has an important role in the initial assessment of these patients, although a combination of imaging and laboratory and genetic tests is often needed for complete evaluation and management. This document summarizes the imaging appropriateness data for rapidly progressive dementia, chorea, Parkinsonian syndromes, suspected neurodegeneration with brain iron accumulation, and suspected motor neuron disease. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) have enjoyed wide use since their introduction some 30 years ago. Used in as many as 30% of MRIs performed in the United States, GBCAs have generally been associated with low rates of adverse events. However, the safety profile and attendant medicolegal liability associated with GBCAs changed in 2016 with the description of gadolinium deposition disease (GDD). Despite being unproven scientifically, a groundswell of GDD-related litigation and personal injury advertising targeting potential GDD patients has occurred. In this article, we describe what GDD is, why GDD has created medicolegal risk, and how this risk might be mitigated. This article advocates using a risk mitigation strategy focused on reducing brain gadolinium retention during the period of purported GDD development. As such, based on the currently available data, the authors recommend the preferential use of gadoteridol as the default GBCA for MRI imaging., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Regular contact with a primary care physician (PCP) is associated with increased participation in screening mammography. Older studies suggested that PCP interaction may have a smaller effect on screening mammography uptake among racial and ethnic minorities compared with whites, but there is limited contemporary evidence about the effect of PCP interaction on screening mammography uptake across different racial and ethnic groups. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association between PCP contact and longitudinal adherence with screening mammography guidelines over a 10-year period across different racial/ethnic groups., Methods: This HIPAA-compliant and institutional review board-approved retrospective single-institution study included women between the ages of 50 and 64 years who underwent screening mammography in the calendar year of 2005. The primary outcome of interest was adherence to recommended screening mammography guidelines (yes or no) at each 2-year interval from their index screening mammographic examination in 2005 until 2015. Patients were defined as having a high level of PCP interaction if their PCPs were listed in the electronic medical record within the top three providers with whom the patients had the most visits during the study period. Generalized estimating equation models were used to estimate the effect of high PCP interaction on screening mammography adherence while adjusting for correlated observations and patient characteristics., Results: Patients in the high PCP interaction group had increased longitudinal adherence to recommended screening mammography (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.42-1.73; P < .001). This was observed in stratified analyses for all self-reported racial groups, including white (adjusted OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.36-1.68; P < .001), black (adjusted OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.31-2.86; P = .001), Hispanic (adjusted OR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.27-2.87; P = .002), Asian (adjusted OR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.01-2.39; P = .045), and other (adjusted OR, 2.18; 95% CI, 1.32-3.56; P = .002), with no evidence of effect modification by race/ethnicity (P = .342). Medicaid (adjusted OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.31-0.53) and self-pay or other (adjusted OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.27-0.56) insurance categories were associated with decreased longitudinal adherence to recommended screening mammography (P < .001 for both)., Conclusions: High levels of PCP interaction result in similar improvements in longitudinal screening mammography adherence for all racial/ethnic minority groups. Future efforts will require targeted outreach to assist Medicaid and uninsured patient populations overcome barriers to screening mammography adherence., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Ataxia can result from an abnormality in the cerebellum, spinal cord, peripheral nerves, and/or vestibular system. Pathology involving the brain, such as infarct or hydrocephalus, can also present with ataxia as part of the symptom constitution, or result in symptoms that mimic ataxia. Clinical evaluation by history and careful neurological examination is important to help with lesion localization, and helps determine where imaging should be focused. In the setting of trauma with the area of suspicion in the brain, a head CT without intravenous contrast is the preferred initial imaging choice. If vascular injury is suspected, CTA of the neck can be helpful. When the area of suspicion is in the spine, CT or MRI of the spine can be considered to assess for bony or soft-tissue injury, respectively. In the setting of ataxia unrelated to recent trauma, MRI is the preferred imaging modality, tailored to assess the brain or spine depending on the area of suspected pathology. The use of intravenous contrast is generally helpful. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

There are a wide variety of diseases that affect the thyroid gland ranging from hyperplastic to neoplastic, autoimmune, or inflammatory. They can present with functional abnormality or a palpable structural change. Imaging has a key role in diagnosing and characterizing the thyroid finding for management. Imaging is also essential in the management of thyroid cancer. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess differences in interreader variability among radiologists after the implementation of a computer-assisted reporting (CAR) tool for the interpretation of degenerative disc disease on lumbar spine MRI., Methods: Thirty lumbar spine MRI examinations were selected from the radiology database. Five fellowship-trained musculoskeletal radiologists evaluated each L4-L5 disc in a blinded fashion and reported the findings using a traditional free dictation approach. One month later, they reinterpreted the same discs using a web browser-based CAR tool in the same blinded fashion. The degrees of central canal stenosis, neural foraminal stenosis, and facet joint osteoarthritis; presence or absence of lateral recess stenosis; types of disc bulge or herniation; and herniation location using both methods were recorded. Percentage disagreement among the radiologists for each variable was calculated and compared using the Wilcoxon signed rank test., Results: There was a statistically significant decrease among the five radiologists in percentage disagreement for neural foraminal stenosis (46% versus 35%, P = .0146) and facet joint osteoarthritis (45% and 22%, P < .0001) for reports created by free dictation compared with those created using the CAR tool. There was no statistically significant difference in interreader variability for the assessment of central canal stenosis, lateral recess effacement, disc herniation, disc bulge, or herniation location., Conclusions: Implementation of a CAR tool for the interpretation of degenerative changes on lumbar spine MRI decreases interreader variability in the assessment of neural foraminal stenosis and facet joint osteoarthritis., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: As health care payment systems transition from fee-for-service to bundled payments, there is an increasing opportunity for radiologists to collaborate to improve population-based health care outcomes. Our purpose was to estimate the extent to which patients engaged in mammography underwent other additional imaging- and non-imaging-based preventative health services using Centers for Disease Control National Population Health Surveys., Methods: Women aged 40 to 74 in the 2014 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System cross-sectional survey without histories of breast cancer who reported having a mammogram within the past 2 years were included. Adherence to recommended preventative services was based on US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations, relative to the time at which the survey participant responded to the survey. Among women reporting being engaged in mammography, proportions of eligible women obtaining recommended preventative health services were calculated and stratified by demographics., Results: Of 172,245 women, 122,434 (71.1%) reported mammography within 2 years. The following percentages obtained recommended flu vaccines (49.2%), pneumococcal vaccines (69.5%), colorectal cancer screening (74.8%), and Papanicolaou test (93.2%). Women reporting mammography within the last 2 years with lower levels of education and income and who lacked health insurance or personal doctors were less likely to report receiving recommended preventative services (P < .001)., Conclusions: National population-based survey results suggest that large proportions of women engaged in mammography report are not up to date with a wide variety of recommended preventative health services, suggesting ample opportunities for radiology practices to partner with providers to improve population-based health outcomes and add value to health care systems., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Visual loss can be the result of an abnormality anywhere along the visual pathway including the globe, optic nerve, optic chiasm, optic tract, thalamus, optic radiations or primary visual cortex. Appropriate imaging analysis of visual loss is facilitated by a compartmental approach that establishes a differential diagnosis on the basis of suspected lesion location and specific clinical features. CT and MRI are the primary imaging modalities used to evaluate patients with visual loss and are often complementary in evaluating these patients. One modality may be preferred over the other depending on the specific clinical scenario. Depending on the pattern of visual loss and differential diagnosis, imaging coverage may require targeted evaluation of the orbits and/or assessment of the brain. Contrast is preferred when masses and inflammatory processes are differential considerations. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of wait days (WDs) on missed outpatient MRI appointments across different demographic and socioeconomic factors., Methods: An institutional review board-approved retrospective study was conducted among adult patients scheduled for outpatient MRI during a 12-month period. Scheduling data and demographic information were obtained. Imaging missed appointments were defined as missed scheduled imaging encounters. WDs were defined as the number of days from study order to appointment. Multivariate logistic regression was applied to assess the contribution of race and socioeconomic factors to missed appointments. Linear regression was performed to assess the relationship between missed appointment rates and WDs stratified by race, income, and patient insurance groups with analysis of covariance statistics., Results: A total of 42,727 patients met the inclusion criteria. Mean WDs were 7.95 days. Multivariate regression showed increased odds ratio for missed appointments for patients with increased WDs (7-21 days: odds ratio [OR], 1.39; >21 days: OR, 1.77), African American patients (OR, 1.71), Hispanic patients (OR, 1.30), patients with noncommercial insurance (OR, 2.00-2.55), and those with imaging performed at the main hospital campus (OR, 1.51). Missed appointment rate linearly increased with WDs, with analysis of covariance revealing underrepresented minorities and Medicaid insurance as significant effect modifiers., Conclusions: Increased WDs for advanced imaging significantly increases the likelihood of missed appointments. This effect is most pronounced among underrepresented minorities and patients with lower socioeconomic status. Efforts to reduce WDs may improve equity in access to and utilization of advanced diagnostic imaging for all patients., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Evaluation of cranial neuropathy can be complex given the different pathway of each cranial nerve as well as the associated anatomic landmarks. Radiological evaluation requires imaging of the entire course of the nerve from its nucleus to the end organ. MRI is the modality of choice with CT playing a complementary role, particularly in the evaluation of the bone anatomy. Since neoplastic and inflammatory lesions are prevalent on the differential diagnosis, contrast enhanced studies are preferred when possible. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidencebased guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To test whether data elements available in the electronic medical record (EMR) can be effectively leveraged to predict failure to attend a scheduled radiology examination., Materials and Methods: Using data from a large academic medical center, we identified all patients with a diagnostic imaging examination scheduled from January 1, 2016, to April 1, 2016, and determined whether the patient successfully attended the examination. Demographic, clinical, and health services utilization variables available in the EMR potentially relevant to examination attendance were recorded for each patient. We used descriptive statistics and logistic regression models to test whether these data elements could predict failure to attend a scheduled radiology examination. The predictive accuracy of the regression models were determined by calculating the area under the receiver operator curve., Results: Among the 54,652 patient appointments with radiology examinations scheduled during the study period, 6.5% were no-shows. No-show rates were highest for the modalities of mammography and CT and lowest for PET and MRI. Logistic regression indicated that 16 of the 27 demographic, clinical, and health services utilization factors were significantly associated with failure to attend a scheduled radiology examination (P ≤ .05). Stepwise logistic regression analysis demonstrated that previous no-shows, days between scheduling and appointments, modality type, and insurance type were most strongly predictive of no-show. A model considering all 16 data elements had good ability to predict radiology no-shows (area under the receiver operator curve = 0.753). The predictive ability was similar or improved when these models were analyzed by modality., Conclusion: Patient and examination information readily available in the EMR can be successfully used to predict radiology no-shows. Moving forward, this information can be proactively leveraged to identify patients who might benefit from additional patient engagement through appointment reminders or other targeted interventions to avoid no-shows., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Decreasing unnecessary variation in radiology reporting and producing guideline-concordant reports is fundamental to radiology's success in value-based payment models and good for patient care. In this article, we present an open authoring system for point-of-care clinical decision support tools integrated into the radiologist reporting environment referred to as the computer-assisted reporting and decision support (CAR/DS) framework. The CAR/DS authoring system, described herein, includes: (1) a definition format for representing radiology clinical guidelines as structured, machine-readable Extensible Markup Language documents and (2) a user-friendly reference implementation to test the fidelity of the created definition files with the clinical guideline. The proposed definition format and reference implementation will enable content creators to develop CAR/DS tools that voice recognition software (VRS) vendors can use to extend the commercial tools currently in use. In making the definition format and reference implementation software freely available, we hope to empower individual radiologists, expert groups such as the ACR, and VRS vendors to develop a robust ecosystem of CAR/DS tools that can further improve the quality and efficiency of the patient care that our field provides. We hope that this initial effort can serve as the basis for a community-owned open standard for guideline definition that the imaging informatics and VRS vendor communities will embrace and strengthen. To this end, the ACR Assist™ initiative is intended to make the College's clinical content, including the Incidental Findings Committee White Papers, available for decision support tool creation based upon the herein described CAR/DS framework., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To assess whether text-based appointment reminders are a cost-effective strategy to decrease patient no-shows and improve arrival punctuality in the setting of outpatient radiology imaging., Methods and Materials: From July 2016 through October 2016, all patients scheduled for MRI imaging at two outpatient locations were randomly assigned to a texting or nontexting arm based on the day. On texting days, patients scheduled for MRI received both the traditional phone call reminder as well as a text-based reminder of their MRI examination. On nontexting days, patients scheduled for MRI received only the traditional phone call reminder. All patients were evaluated based on whether they attended the MRI appointment and, if attended, whether they arrived 30 minutes before the MRI appointment as requested in the text message. Potential associations between the text reminder and examination attendance and punctuality were assessed by χ 2 test with associations considered significant at P ≤ .05., Results: A total of 6,989 patients were eligible for analysis, 3,086 in the texting group and 3,903 in the nontexting group. In the texting group, 67.5% (2,083/3,086) of patients were successfully texted with an appointment reminder, with the other 32.5% not having text accessibility. The percent of no-shows was significantly decreased for the texting group compared with the nontexting group (3.8% versus 5.1%, P = .02, odds ratio 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 0.94). There was no significant difference between the percent of patients arriving the requested 30 minutes before the MRI appointment between the texting and nontexting groups (60.0% versus 58.5%, P = .25)., Conclusion: Text message appointment reminders are an effective strategy for decreasing radiology no-shows, even in the presence of traditional phone reminders, but do not improve patient arrival punctuality., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The current fee-for-service system for health care reimbursement in the United Stated is argued to encourage fragmented care delivery and a lack of accountability that predisposes to insufficient focus on quality as well as unnecessary or duplicative resource utilization. Episode payment models (EPMs) seek to improve coordination by linking payments for all services related to a patient's condition or procedure, thereby improving quality and efficiency of care. The CMS Innovation Center has implemented a broadening array of EPMs. Early models with relevance to radiologists include Bundled Payment for Care Improvement (involving 48 possible clinical conditions), Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (involving knee and hip replacement), and the Oncology Care Model (involving chemotherapy). In July 2016, CMS expanded the range of EPMs through three new models with mandatory hospital participation addressing inpatient and 90-day postdischarge care for acute myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass graft, and surgical hip and femur fracture treatment. Moreover, some of the EPMs include tracks that allow participating entities to qualify as an Advanced Alternative Payment Model under the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (MACRA), reaping the associated reporting and payment benefits. Even though none of the available EPMs are radiology specific, the models will nevertheless likely influence reimbursements for some radiologists. Thus, radiologists should partner with hospitals and other specialties in care coordination through these episode-based initiatives, thereby having opportunities to apply their imaging expertise to help lower spending while improving quality and overall levels of health., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Diseases of the cerebral vasculature represent a heterogeneous group of ischemic and hemorrhagic etiologies, which often manifest clinically as an acute neurologic deficit also known as stroke or less commonly with symptoms such as headache or seizures. Stroke is the fourth leading cause of death and is a leading cause of serious long-term disability in the United States. Eighty-seven percent of strokes are ischemic, 10% are due to intracerebral hemorrhage, and 3% are secondary to subarachnoid hemorrhage. The past two decades have seen significant developments in the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of ischemic and hemorrhagic causes of stroke with advancements in CT and MRI technology and novel treatment devices and techniques. Multiple different imaging modalities can be used in the evaluation of cerebrovascular disease. The different imaging modalities all have their own niches and their own advantages and disadvantages in the evaluation of cerebrovascular disease. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Most patients presenting with uncomplicated acute low back pain (LBP) and/or radiculopathy do not require imaging. Imaging is considered in those patients who have had up to 6 weeks of medical management and physical therapy that resulted in little or no improvement in their back pain. It is also considered for those patients presenting with red flags raising suspicion for serious underlying conditions, such as cauda equina syndrome, malignancy, fracture, and infection. Many imaging modalities are available to clinicians and radiologists for evaluating LBP. Application of these modalities depends largely on the working diagnosis, the urgency of the clinical problem, and comorbidities of the patient. When there is concern for fracture of the lumbar spine, multidetector CT is recommended. Those deemed to be interventional candidates, with LBP lasting for > 6 weeks having completed conservative management with persistent radiculopathic symptoms, may seek MRI. Patients with severe or progressive neurologic deficit on presentation and red flags should be evaluated with MRI. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of appropriate neuroimaging on the basis of the ACR Appropriateness Criteria among pediatric patients presenting after head trauma to a level I emergency department., Methods: A retrospective emergency department record review was performed for patients <18 years of age undergoing head CT or MRI for the indication "head trauma" between January 2013 and December 2014. Clinical history and symptoms were compared with the ACR Appropriateness Criteria; the indication was deemed appropriate for ratings of ≥7. Patients were analyzed by age, gender, presentation, imaging obtained, follow-up, treatment, and outcomes., Results: Among 207 patients, 120 (58%) were imaged with CT and 107 (52%) with MRI; 20 patients underwent both CT and MRI. One hundred eighty-seven patients (90.3%) were appropriately imaged, with 90.0% of CT studies (108 of 120) deemed appropriate and 91.6% of MRI studies (98 of 107) deemed appropriate. Younger patients were more likely to be inappropriately imaged with CT or MRI than older patients (P = .02 and P < .01, respectively). Patients undergoing CT were older (mean age 9.9 ± 5.8 years) and more likely to be male (85.2%) than those undergoing MRI (5.6 ± 5.6 years and 55.1%, respectively) (P < .01 and P < .001, respectively). The diagnostic yield of positive imaging findings for intracranial trauma was significantly lower in the MRI group (P < .01), and patients undergoing MRI were significantly more likely to return to baseline with conservative management (P < .01)., Conclusions: Most pediatric patients undergoing neuroimaging for head trauma did so appropriately per ACR guidelines and had symptom resolution with conservative management. The minority not imaged appropriately represent a target for quality improvement efforts., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The authors explore the benefits and risks of not reporting imaging findings that do not have clinical relevance, with the goal of developing recommendations to reduce their reporting. The authors review the example of incidentally detected, simple renal cysts (Bosniak category I), including medicolegal conditions required for such a shift in reporting practices to be acceptable. The authors propose four potential criteria for not reporting clinically unimportant findings and recommend that these criteria be debated in other contexts, so that they can be refined and implemented., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Leakage (out-of-network referral) is undesirable because it limits ability to control costs of services. Clinical decision support (CDS) systems seek to ensure appropriate imaging of patients but theoretically could drive leakage if ordering providers attempt to circumvent CDS recommendations and obtain studies from other imaging providers. This study assessed the incidence of leakage of imaging studies that had low appropriateness scores., Methods: We queried our outpatient CDS system over a three-year period (2011-2013) for studies that received a low CDS appropriateness score and were canceled by the ordering physician. For patients meeting these criteria and participating in risk-shared contracts, we cross-referenced their imaging utilization reports in the risk-contract insurance payment database to determine if they received outpatient imaging within 60 days of the index order, contrary to the decision support recommendation., Results: The risk-shared insurance database contained an average of 63,378 patients who had 18,008 MRIs and 18,014 CTs. A total of 11,234 (31.2%) studies were leaked: 3,513 (9.8%) to affiliated institutions; 7,721 (21.4%) to unaffiliated imaging facilities. Overall, 111 imaging studies received a low appropriateness score in the risk-shared patient population and were performed within 60 days despite the low score. Of these studies, 106 of 111 (95.5%) were ultimately performed within our hospital system (104 at the home institution; 2 at affiliated institutions); only 5 of 111 (4.5%) were performed outside of our hospital system., Conclusions: Decision support systems for ordering providers do not seem to drive imaging referrals out of hospital systems to other institutions. Hospital systems can implement decision support without fear of this occurring., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of the consensus-oriented group review (COGR) method of radiologist peer review within a large subspecialty imaging department., Methods: This study was institutional review board approved and HIPAA compliant. Radiologist interpretations of CT, MRI, and ultrasound examinations at a large academic radiology department were subject to peer review using the COGR method from October 2011 through September 2013. Discordance rates and sources of discordance were evaluated on the basis of modality and division, with group differences compared using a χ(2) test. Potential associations between peer review outcomes and the time after the initiation of peer review or the number of radiologists participating in peer review were tested by linear regression analysis and the t test, respectively., Results: A total of 11,222 studies reported by 83 radiologists were peer reviewed using COGR during the two-year study period. The average radiologist participated in 112 peer review conferences and had 3.3% of his or her available CT, MRI and ultrasound studies peer reviewed. The rate of discordance was 2.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.4%-3.0%), with significant differences in discordance rates on the basis of division and modality. Discordance rates were highest for MR (3.4%; 95% CI, 2.8%-4.1%), followed by ultrasound (2.7%; 95% CI, 2.0%-3.4%) and CT (2.4%; 95% CI, 2.0%-2.8%). Missed findings were the most common overall cause for discordance (43.8%; 95% CI, 38.2%-49.4%), followed by interpretive errors (23.5%; 95% CI, 18.8%-28.3%), dictation errors (19.0%; 95% CI, 14.6%-23.4%), and recommendation (10.8%; 95% CI, 7.3%-14.3%). Discordant cases, compared with concordant cases, were associated with a significantly greater number of radiologists participating in the peer review process (5.9 vs 4.7 participating radiologists, P < .001) and were significantly more likely to lead to an addendum (62.9% vs 2.7%, P < .0001)., Conclusions: COGR permits departments to collect highly contextualized peer review data to better elucidate sources of error in diagnostic imaging reports, while reviewing a sufficient case volume to comply with external standards for ongoing performance review., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the frequency and liability costs associated with radiology malpractice claims relative to other medical services and to evaluate the clinical context and case disposition associated with radiology malpractice claims., Methods: This HIPAA-compliant study was exempted from institutional review board approval. The Comparative Benchmarking System database, a repository of more than 300,000 medical malpractice cases in the United States, was queried for closed claims over a five-year period (2008-2012). Claims were categorized by the medical service primarily responsible for the claim and the paid total loss. For all cases in which radiology was the primary responsible service, the case abstracts were evaluated to determine injury severity, claimant type by setting, claim allegation, process of care involved, case disposition, modality involved, and body section. Intracategory comparisons were made on the basis of the frequency of indemnity payment and total indemnity payment for paid cases, using χ(2) and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests., Results: Radiology was the eighth most likely responsible service to be implicated in a medical malpractice claim, with a median total paid loss (indemnity payment plus defense cost plus administrative expense) per closed case of $30,091 (mean, $205,619 ± $508,883). Radiology claims were most commonly associated with high- and medium-severity injuries (93.3% [820 of 879]; 95% confidence interval [CI], 91.7%-94.95%), the outpatient setting (66.3% [581 of 876]; 95% CI, 63.0%-69.2%), and diagnosis-related allegations (ie, failure to diagnose or delayed diagnosis) (57.3% [504 of 879]; 95% CI, 54.0%-60.6%). A high proportion of claims pertained to cancer diagnoses (44.0% [222 of 504]; 95% CI, 39.7%-48.3%). A total of 62.3% (548 of 879; 95% CI, 59.1%-65.5%) of radiology claims were closed without indemnity payments; 37.7% (331 of 879; 95% CI, 34.5%-40.9%) were closed with a median indemnity payment of $175,000 (range, $112-$6,691,762; mean $481,094 ± $727,636)., Conclusions: Radiology malpractice claims most commonly involve diagnosis-related allegations in the outpatient setting, particularly cancer diagnoses, with approximately one-third of claims resulting in payouts to the claimants., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of a workstation-integrated, point-of-care, clinical decision support (CDS) tool on radiologist adherence to radiology department guidelines for follow-up of incidental pulmonary nodules detected on abdominal CT., Methods: The CDS tool was developed to facilitate adherence to department guidelines for managing pulmonary nodules seen on abdominal CT. In October 2012, the tool was deployed within the radiology department of an academic medical center and could be used for a given abdominal CT at the discretion of the interpreting radiologist. We retrospectively identified consecutive patients who underwent abdominal CT (in the period from January 2012 to April 2013), had no comparison CT scans available, and were reported to have a solid, noncalcified, pulmonary nodule. Concordance between radiologist follow-up recommendation and department guidelines was compared among three groups: patients scanned before implementation of the CDS tool; and patients scanned after implementation, with versus without use of the tool., Results: A total of 409 patients were identified, including 268 for the control group. Overall, guideline concordance was higher after CDS tool implementation (92 of 141 [65%] versus 133 of 268 [50%], P = .003). This finding was driven by the subset of post-CDS implementation cases in which the CDS tool was used (57 of 141 [40%]). In these cases, guideline concordance was significantly higher (54 of 57 [95%]), compared with post-implementation cases in which CDS was not used (38 of 84 [45%], P < .001), and to a control group of patients from before implementation (133 of 268 [50%]; P < .001)., Conclusions: A point-of-care CDS tool was associated with improved adherence to guidelines for follow-up of incidental pulmonary nodules., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To evaluate non-research-related, physician-industry financial relationships in the United States, in 2013, as reported pursuant to the Physician Payments Sunshine Act (a provision of the Affordable Care Act)., Methods: In September 2014, CMS released the first five months (August 2013 to December 2013) of data disclosing physician-industry financial relationships. The frequency and value of non-research-related transfers in radiology were calculated and compared with those for 19 other specialties. Subanalyses of the frequency and value of such transfers in radiology were performed, based on state of licensure, radiologic subspecialty, nature of payment, manufacturer identity, and drug or device involved., Results: A total of 7.4% (2,654 of 35,768) of radiologists from the United States had reportable non-research-related financial relationship(s) with industry during the 5-month period, the second-lowest level among the medical specialties evaluated. The average value of non-research-related transfers of value to radiologists, excluding royalties and licenses, was low ($438.71; SD: $2,912.15; median: $43.85), with <4% of radiologists receiving >$10 per month. Of all categories, that of food and beverage had the most transfers of value (86.0%; 5,655 of 6,577); royalties and licensure were associated with the greatest average value ($27,072.34; SD: $67,524.92). Although high-value relationships were rare, 57.8% (26 of 45) of radiologists who received a value >$1,000 per month held leadership positions in imaging enterprises., Conclusions: Less than 4% of radiologists have non-research-related financial relationships with industry that are valued at >$10 per month, suggesting that meaningful, deleterious effects of such relationships on radiology practice, if present, are infrequent., (Copyright © 2015 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between the wording of radiologist recommendations for chest CT with the likelihood of recommendation adherence and the diagnostic yield of the recommended follow-up CT imaging., Methods: This HIPAA-compliant retrospective study had institutional review board approval, including waiver of the requirement for patient consent. All outpatient chest radiographic (CXR) studies performed at a tertiary care academic medical center in 2008 (n = 29,138) were searched to identify examinations with recommendations for chest CT. The wording of chest CT recommendations was classified as conditional or absolute, on the basis of whether the recommendation stood independent of the clinical judgment of the ordering clinician. Using the radiology information system, patients who underwent chest CT within 90 days of the index CXR study containing the recommendation were determined, and the CT studies were evaluated to determine if there were abnormalities corresponding to the CXR abnormalities that prompted the recommendations. Corresponding abnormalities were categorized as clinically relevant or not, on the basis of whether further workup or treatment was warranted. Groups were compared using t tests and Fisher exact tests., Results: Recommendations for chest CT appeared in 4.5% of outpatient CXR studies (1,316 of 29,138; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.3%-4.8%); 39.4% (519 of 1,316; 95% CI, 36.8%-42.0%) were conditional and 60.6% (797 of 1,316; 95% CI, 58.0%-63.2%) were absolute. Patients with absolute recommendations were significantly more likely to undergo follow-up chest CT within 90 days than patients with conditional recommendations (67.8% vs 45.8%, respectively, P < .001). Despite this difference in provider adherence, there was no significant difference between the conditional and absolute recommendation groups with regard to the incidence of clinically relevant corresponding findings (P = .16) or malignancy (P = .08) on follow-up CT., Conclusions: Conditional radiologist recommendations are associated with decreased provider adherence, though the likelihood of a clinically relevant finding on follow-up CT is no different than with absolute recommendations., (Copyright © 2015 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate radiologist compliance with institutional guidelines for nonroutine communication of diagnostic imaging results., Methods: From July 2012 through September 2013, 7,401 completed advanced imaging cases were retrospectively reviewed by groups of 3 or more radiologists. The reviewing radiologists were asked to reach consensus on two questions related to nonroutine communication: (1) "Does the report describe a finding which requires nonroutine communication to the patient's physicians?" and if so, (2) "Were the department's guidelines for nonroutine communication followed?" Consensus judgments were aggregated and analyzed on the basis of subspecialty, level of acuity per the guidelines, and type of communication used., Results: Of the 7,401 studies reviewed, 960 (13.0%) were deemed to require nonroutine results communication. The need for nonroutine communication was most frequent with CT (16.6%), followed by MRI (11.1%) and ultrasound (3.4%). For the divisions studied, nonroutine communication was most frequently needed in thoracic (37.9%), followed by neurologic (17.3%), emergency (15.8%), cardiac (13.7%), musculoskeletal (4.4%), and abdominal (0.7%) imaging. Of the cases requiring nonroutine communication, 39 (4%) yielded consensus that the guidelines were not appropriately followed: 21% (n = 8) involved level 1 findings (critical), 41% (n = 16) involved level 2 findings (acute), and 38% (n = 15) involved level 3 findings (nonacute). Failures of communication involving level 1 findings primarily involved neurologic imaging, including 4 cases of new cerebral infarct and 3 cases of new intracranial hemorrhage., Conclusions: Established guidelines for nonroutine communication are appropriately applied and durable, underscoring the high yield of formalizing and implementing these guidelines across practice settings., (Copyright © 2015 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To assess the prevalence of appropriate imaging among emergency department (ED) patients with low back pain., Methods: Our level-1 ED records were retrospectively searched for patients with a chief compliant of "low back pain" from January to April 2013. Of 624 patients, 100 were randomly selected and analyzed for their demographics, presentation, imaging, treatment, and outcomes. The study indication for imaging was compared with the ACR Appropriateness Criteria, and the indication was deemed appropriate if it received a rating of ≥5., Results: The mean age of the study population was 48 years (50% women, 50% men). The majority presented with acute or acute on chronic low back pain (94 patients), and half had a precipitating event (50 patients). A total of 28 (28%) patients underwent imaging in the ED; 24 (24%) had outpatient imaging; 54 (54%) had neither ED nor outpatient imaging. In all, 96% (27 of 28) of patients imaged in the ED, and 96% (23 of 24) imaged as outpatients, were appropriately imaged. Of patients who did not undergo imaging, 96% (52 of 54) were appropriately not imaged. A total of 76 patients (76%) had follow-up after discharge: of these, 42 (55%) had resolution or return of pain to baseline with conservative management; 18 (24%) had improvement with intervention (epidural steroid injection or kyphoplasty); 8 (10%) improved with surgery; and 8 had persistent pain (11%)., Conclusions: The majority of patients presenting to the ED with low back pain did not undergo imaging. The vast majority of those who underwent imaging were appropriately imaged, based on the ACR Appropriateness Criteria., (Copyright © 2015 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the findings of the first year of validation site surveys performed by the ACR pursuant to new federal accreditation requirements for nonhospital advanced diagnostic imaging (ADI) facilities., Methods: In the first year of validation site surveys (November 2012 to November 2013), the ACR surveyed 943 ADI facilities across 21 states. Data were extracted from these site survey reports and analyzed on the basis of the survey outcomes and the frequency and type of deficiencies and recommendations. Follow-up data were obtained from the ACR for facilities deemed noncompliant on the site survey to determine if these facilities adequately took the corrective actions necessary to maintain accreditation., Results: Of the 943 ADI facilities surveyed, 45% (n = 421) were deemed compliant with the ACR accreditation standards, and 55% (n = 522) had one or more deficiencies. Failure to produce the required personnel documentation and absence of mandatory written policies were the two most common causes of deficiencies. Facilities accredited in more modalities tended to fare better in the site surveys, with the number of accredited modalities at a facility negatively associated with the likelihood of a deficiency (P = .007). Of the facilities with deficiencies, 73% (n = 382) took the necessary corrective actions to maintain accreditation, 27% (n = 140) were in the process of taking corrective actions, and no facility has lost accreditation because of an inability to adequately address the deficiencies. Nonbinding recommendations were made to 37% (n = 346) of facilities, and facilities with deficiencies were statistically more likely to receive recommendations (P < .001)., Conclusions: Initial site surveys of ADI facilities demonstrated a high proportion of deficient facilities, but no facility has lost accreditation because of an inability to correct these deficiencies. Knowledge of the most common sources of deficiencies and recommendations can assist ACR-accredited ADI facilities in better preparing for validation site surveys, reducing the likelihood of facility noncompliance., (Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess the status of the radiology job market as represented by the ACR Jobs Board from October 2010 to June 2013., Methods: With the assistance of the ACR, data from the ACR Jobs Board from October 2010 through June 2013, including the numbers of monthly new job seekers, new job postings, and job posting clicks, were gathered and used to calculate a monthly competitive index, defined as the ratio of new job seekers to new job postings., Results: During the study period, the mean number of new job seekers was 168 per month, which was significantly greater than the 84 average new job postings for any given month (P = .0002). There was no significant difference between 2011 and 2012 with regard to the number of new job seekers or job postings. Over the time period assessed, more new job seekers registered in October and November 2010, August to November 2011, and October and November 2012. These periods were also associated with the highest competitive index values. There were less job seekers in the winter and spring of 2011, 2012, and 2013, periods associated with lower competitive index values. ACR Jobs Board activity, measured by job posting clicks, was significantly higher in 2012 than in 2011 (P < .004)., Conclusions: On the basis of the ACR Jobs Board, there were consistently more new job seekers than job postings throughout the study period, and fall is the period in the year most associated with the highest competitive index for radiologist employment., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The Joint Commission and other regulatory bodies have mandated that health care organizations implement processes for ongoing physician performance review. Software solutions, such as RADPEER™, have been created to meet this need efficiently. However, the authors believe that available systems are not optimally designed to produce changes in practice and overlook many important aspects of quality by excessive focus on diagnosis. The authors present a new model of peer review known as consensus-oriented group review, which is based on group discussion of cases in a conference setting and places greater emphasis on feedback than traditional systems of radiology peer review. By focusing on the process of peer review, consensus-oriented group review is intended to optimize performance improvement and foster group standards of practice. The authors also describe the software tool developed to implement this process of enriched peer review., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

A fundamental element of health care payment reform under the Affordable Care Act is the development of Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs). The ACO model employs shared-risk contracts to better align the interests of health care providers and payers with the intent of driving efficiency and quality in care. The Medicare Shared Savings Program is the most popular of the Medicare ACO programs, with over 200 health systems across the nation participating at this time. However, a pitfall in the way that the Medicare Shared Savings Program is structured, specifically the benchmarking and rebasing method, could make it difficult for even top-performing ACOs to achieve sustained success, thereby threatening the long-term viability of the program. In this paper, we present this pitfall to the radiology community as well as potential solutions that can be considered by CMS moving forward., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)