Search

A challenge for many clinical users is that a patient may receive a diagnostic imaging (DI) service at a number of hospitals or private imaging clinics. The DI services that patients receive at other locations could be clinically relevant to current treatments, but typically, there is no seamless method for a clinical user to access longitudinal DI results for their patient. Radiologists, and other specialists that are intensive users of image data, require seamless ingestion of foreign exams into the picture archiving and communication system (PACS) to achieve full clinical value. Most commonly, a clinical user will depend on the patient to bring in a CD that contains imaging from another location. However, a number of issues can arise when using this type of solution. Firstly, a CD will not provide the clinical user with the full longitudinal record of the patient. Secondly, a CD often will not contain the report associated with the images. Finally, a CD is not seamless, due to the need to manually import the contents of the CD into the local PACS. In order to overcome these limitations, and provide clinical users with a greater benefit related to a patient's longitudinal DI history, the implementation of foreign exam management (FEM) at the local site level is required. This paper presents the experiences of FEM in practice. By leveraging industry standards and edge devices to support FEM, multiple sites with disparate PACS and radiology information system (RIS) vendors are able to seamlessly ingest foreign exams within their local PACS as if they are local exams.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of applying ACR Lung-RADS in a clinical CT lung screening program on the frequency of positive and false-negative findings., Methods: Consecutive, clinical CT lung screening examinations performed from January 2012 through May 2014 were retroactively reclassified using the new ACR Lung-RADS structured reporting system. All examinations had initially been interpreted by radiologists credentialed in structured CT lung screening reporting following the National Comprehensive Cancer Network's Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Lung Cancer Screening (version 1.2012), which incorporated positive thresholds modeled after those in the National Lung Screening Trial. The positive rate, number of false-negative findings, and positive predictive value were recalculated using the ACR Lung-RADS-specific positive solid/part-solid nodule diameter threshold of 6 mm and nonsolid (ground-glass) threshold of 2 cm. False negatives were defined as cases reclassified as benign under ACR Lung-RADS that were diagnosed with malignancies within 12 months of the baseline examination., Results: A total of 2,180 high-risk patients underwent baseline CT lung screening during the study interval; no clinical follow-up was available in 577 patients (26%). ACR Lung-RADS reduced the overall positive rate from 27.6% to 10.6%. No false negatives were present in the 152 patients with >12-month follow-up reclassified as benign. Applying ACR Lung-RADS increased the positive predictive value for diagnosed malignancy in 1,603 patients with follow-up from 6.9% to 17.3%., Conclusions: The application of ACR Lung-RADS increased the positive predictive value in our CT lung screening cohort by a factor of 2.5, to 17.3%, without increasing the number of examinations with false-negative results., (Copyright © 2015 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Rationale and Objectives: To survey North American radiologists on current practices in structured reporting and language., Materials and Methods: An e-mail invitation was sent to the Association of University Radiologists membership (comprising 910 members) to participate in an online survey that addressed development, use, and experience of structured reporting, language, and imaging classification or reporting systems and personal dictation styles., Results: Of the 910 members e-mailed, 265 (29.1%) responded, 90.6% of whom were from academic teaching hospitals. There were no significant differences in responses based on group size or region of practice. Of all the respondents, 51.3% come from groups that developed structured reporting for at least half of their reports and only 10.9% for none. A significantly fewer 13% of respondents used rigid unmodifiable structures or checklists rather than adaptable outlines; 59.5% respondents report being satisfied or very satisfied with their structured reports, whereas a significantly fewer 13% report being dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. Structured reports were reportedly significantly more likely to be required, appreciated, and to decrease errors in departments using many structured reports compared to groups with less widespread use., Conclusions: Most academic radiology departments are using or experimenting with structured reports. Although radiologist satisfaction with standardization is significant, there are strong opinions about their limitations and value. Our survey suggests that North American radiologists are invested in exploring structured reporting and will hopefully inform future study on how we define a standard report and how much we can centralize this process., (Copyright © 2015 AUR. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Prior studies as well as medical imaging data are crucial for a radiologist to diagnose a patient. In this paper the radiological workflow is analyzed from a patient's perspective in order to gain knowledge on how possible existing prefetching strategies still can be applied in connection with a standardized distributed health information system conforming to architectures defined by IHE and ELGA. As a result an adaption to such architectures is proposed and further evaluated in a testing environment. Although the approach presented works in terms of prefetching relevant prior studies together with medical imaging data, additional research has to be carried out on how to apply intelligent search strategies in order to narrow retrieved results concerning their possible utilization for a specific diagnosis.

Objectives: To investigate whether there is any difference in the presented image quality between a medical grade monitor and a "commercial off-the- shelf" (COTS) monitor when displaying an 8-bit dental image., Methods: The digital imaging and communications in medicine (DICOM) part 14: greyscale standard display function (GSDF) was verified for both monitors. A visual grading characteristics (VGC) curve was constructed to measure the difference in image quality between the two monitors by comparing radiological structures displayed on each monitor with a DICOM part 14: GSDF-calibrated laptop monitor as reference., Results: All of the monitors conformed to within the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group 18 10% tolerance levels for the assessment of the DICOM part 14: GSDF. There was no difference in the preferred perceived visual sensation for the displayed image between the two tested monitors with the area under the VGC curve = 0.53 and 95% confidence interval = 0.47-0.59., Conclusions: A DICOM part 14: GSDF COTS monitor is capable of displaying an image quality that is equally preferred to a DICOM part 14: GSDF medical grade monitor for an 8-bit image file.

Objective: To conduct a systematic review of the literature describing the impact of speech recognition systems on report error rates and productivity in radiology departments., Methods: The search was conducted for relevant papers published from January 1992 to October 2013. Comparative studies reporting any of the following outcomes were selected: error rates, departmental productivity, and radiologist productivity. The retrieved studies were assessed for quality and risk of bias., Results: The literature search identified 85 potentially relevant publications, but, based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, only 20 were included. Most studies were before and after assessments with no control group. There was a large amount of heterogeneity due to differences in the imaging modalities assessed and the outcomes measured. The percentage of reports containing at least one error varied from 4.8% to 89% for speech recognition, and from 2.1% to 22% for transcription. Departmental productivity was improved with decreases in report turnaround times varying from 35% to 99%. Most studies found a lengthening of radiologist dictation time., Conclusion: Overall gains in departmental productivity were high, but radiologist productivity, as measured by the time to produce a report, was diminished.

Consequences of the computerization of laboratory and radiology information system (LIS and RIS) are not well documented. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of computerization of LIS and RIS of four hospitals on performance and quality of care. The study was divided into three phases. First, the subprocesses and information flows of LIS and RIS were described. Then, a literature review was performed in order to identify the indicators used to assess the impact of computerization. Finally, comparisons were made between 2 hospitals. Using the initial framework, each partner described its process mapping concerning LIS and RIS. The review identified a wide panel of indicators. Only 41 were useful to assess the impact of information systems. For each two by two comparison, lists of relevant indicators have been selected from the identified indicators and according to the process mapping comparison. Two by two comparisons have to be completed. Eventually, these indicators may be integrated in the quality process of hospital information systems.

The ACR recognizes that low-dose CT for lung cancer screening has the potential to significantly reduce mortality from lung cancer in the appropriate high-risk population. The ACR supports the recommendations of the US Preventive Services Task Force and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network for screening patients. To be effective, lung cancer screening should be performed at sites providing high-quality low-dose CT examinations overseen and interpreted by qualified physicians using a structured reporting and management system. The ACR has developed a set of tools necessary for radiologists to take the lead on the front lines of lung cancer screening. The ACR Lung Cancer Screening Center designation is built upon the ACR CT accreditation program and requires use of Lung-RADS or a similar structured reporting and management system. This designation provides patients and referring providers with the assurance that they will receive high-quality screening with appropriate follow-up care., (Copyright © 2015 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Medical images exchanged over public networks require a methodology to provide confidentiality for the image, authenticity of the image ownership and source of origin, and image integrity verification. To provide these three security requirements, we propose in this paper a region-based algorithm based on multiple watermarking in the frequency and spatial domains. Confidentiality and authenticity are provided by embedding robust watermarks in the region-of-non-interest (RONI) of the image using a blind scheme in the discrete wavelet transform and singular value decomposition domain (DWT-SVD). On the other hand, integrity is provided by embedding local fragile watermarks in the region-of-interest (ROI) of the image using a reversible scheme in the spatial domain. The integrity provided by the proposed algorithm is implemented on a block-level of the partitioned-image, thus enabling localized detection of tampered regions. The algorithm was evaluated with respect to imperceptibility, robustness, capacity, and tamper localization capability, using MRI, Ultrasound, and X-ray gray-scale medical images. Performance results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm in providing the required security services for telemedicine applications.

Technology standards form the basis for clinical workflow in radiology. This article reviews 3 types of standards relevant for radiology: the DICOM standard for handling images; the Health Level 7 standard for communicating with the health care enterprise; and standards in coding and terminology such as International Classification of Diseases, Current Procedural Terminology, and RadLex. This third category has an impact on radiology reporting and practice management. Familiarity with all these standards can help radiologists optimize operations and plan for the future., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

We reviewed the literature for the impact of service delivery initiatives (SDIs) on patients' waiting times within radiology departments. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, INSPEC and The Cochrane Library for relevant articles published between 1995 and February, 2013. The Cochrane EPOC risk of bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias on studies that met specified design criteria. Fifty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria. The types of SDI implemented included extended scope practice (ESP, three studies), quality management (12 studies), productivity-enhancing technologies (PETs, 29 studies), multiple interventions (11 studies), outsourcing and pay-for-performance (one study each). The uncontrolled pre- and post-intervention and the post-intervention designs were used in 54 (95%) of the studies. The reporting quality was poor: many of the studies did not test and/or report the statistical significance of their results. The studies were highly heterogeneous, therefore meta-analysis was inappropriate. The following type of SDIs showed promising results: extended scope practice; quality management methodologies including Six Sigma, Lean methodology, and continuous quality improvement; productivity-enhancing technologies including speech recognition reporting, teleradiology and computerised physician order entry systems. We have suggested improved study design and the mapping of the definitions of patient waiting times in radiology to generic timelines as a starting point for moving towards a situation where it becomes less restrictive to compare and/or pool the results of future studies in a meta-analysis.

Knowledge contained within in vivo imaging annotated by human experts or computer programs is typically stored as unstructured text and separated from other associated information. The National Cancer Informatics Program (NCIP) Annotation and Image Markup (AIM) Foundation information model is an evolution of the National Institute of Health's (NIH) National Cancer Institute's (NCI) Cancer Bioinformatics Grid (caBIG®) AIM model. The model applies to various image types created by various techniques and disciplines. It has evolved in response to the feedback and changing demands from the imaging community at NCI. The foundation model serves as a base for other imaging disciplines that want to extend the type of information the model collects. The model captures physical entities and their characteristics, imaging observation entities and their characteristics, markups (two- and three-dimensional), AIM statements, calculations, image source, inferences, annotation role, task context or workflow, audit trail, AIM creator details, equipment used to create AIM instances, subject demographics, and adjudication observations. An AIM instance can be stored as a Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) structured reporting (SR) object or Extensible Markup Language (XML) document for further processing and analysis. An AIM instance consists of one or more annotations and associated markups of a single finding along with other ancillary information in the AIM model. An annotation describes information about the meaning of pixel data in an image. A markup is a graphical drawing placed on the image that depicts a region of interest. This paper describes fundamental AIM concepts and how to use and extend AIM for various imaging disciplines.

The Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 3 signifies a probably benign finding and should be reserved for those findings that have a less than 2% risk of malignancy. There are limited data defining the use of this category in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and the imaging features of probably benign lesions are not well defined. Most recent studies have shown that the frequency of use of BI-RADS 3 is comparable with that reported in mammography and ultrasound and that the rate of malignancy is within the targeted range. Several findings, once assessed as BI-RADS 3, are now known to represent benign entities, such as variations of background parenchymal enhancement and intramammary lymph nodes. A subset of masses, foci, and nonmass enhancement can appropriately be assigned BI-RADS 3 on baseline MRI. The BI-RADS 3 is most appropriately used for round, dot-like foci, which are unique and separate from background parenchymal enhancement and for oval masses with circumscribed margins and homogeneous enhancement, such as those typically seen in incidental fibroadenomas. The BI-RADS 3 may also be appropriate for a focal or regional distribution of nonmass enhancement without suspicious features.

Retrospective research is an import tool in radiology. Identifying imaging examinations appropriate for a given research question from the unstructured radiology reports is extremely useful, but labor-intensive. Using the machine learning text-mining methods implemented in LingPipe [1], we evaluated the performance of the dynamic language model (DLM) and the Naïve Bayesian (NB) classifiers in classifying radiology reports to facilitate identification of radiological examinations for research projects. The training dataset consisted of 14,325 sentences from 11,432 radiology reports randomly selected from a database of 5,104,594 reports in all disciplines of radiology. The training sentences were categorized manually into six categories (Positive, Differential, Post Treatment, Negative, Normal, and History). A 10-fold cross-validation [2] was used to evaluate the performance of the models, which were tested in classification of radiology reports for cases of sellar or suprasellar masses and colloid cysts. The average accuracies for the DLM and NB classifiers were 88.5% with 95% confidence interval (CI) of 1.9% and 85.9% with 95% CI of 2.0%, respectively. The DLM performed slightly better and was used to classify 1,397 radiology reports containing the keywords "sellar or suprasellar mass", or "colloid cyst". The DLM model produced an accuracy of 88.2% with 95% CI of 2.1% for 959 reports that contain "sellar or suprasellar mass" and an accuracy of 86.3% with 95% CI of 2.5% for 437 reports of "colloid cyst". We conclude that automated classification of radiology reports using machine learning techniques can effectively facilitate the identification of cases suitable for retrospective research.

Interoperability is a major focus of the quickly evolving world of Health IT. Easy, yet secure and confidential exchange of imaging exams and the associated reports must be a part of the solutions that are implemented. The availability of historical exams is essential in providing a quality interpretation and reducing inappropriate utilization of imaging services. Today, the exchange of imaging exams is most often achieved via a compact disc. We describe the virtues of this solution as well as challenges that have surfaced. Internet- and cloud-based technologies employed for many consumer services can provide a better solution. Vendors are making these solutions available. Standards for Internet-based exchange are emerging. Just as radiology converged on DICOM as a standard to store and view images, we need a common exchange standard. We will review the existing standards and how they are organized into useful workflows through Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise profiles. Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise and standards development processes are discussed. Health care and the domain of radiology must stay current with quickly evolving Internet standards. The successful use of the "cloud" will depend on both the technologies and the policies put into place around them, both of which we discuss. The radiology community must lead the way and provide a solution that works for radiologists and clinicians with use of the electronic medical record. We describe features we believe radiologists should consider when adding Internet-based exchange solutions to their practice., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: As the use of medical images in applications other than direct patient care increases, the need for deidentified images grows. Federal regulations govern the requirements for deidentification, and software developers offer several methods for deidentification., Conclusion: However, there are numerous ways for protected health information to be included in images other than in DICOM headers. Either such information must be obscured or the images containing the information must be deleted to comply with deidentification requirements.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of requiring clinical justification to override decision support alerts on repeat use of CT., Subjects and Methods: This before and after intervention study was conducted at a 793-bed tertiary hospital with computerized physician order entry and clinical decision support systems. When a CT order is placed, decision support alerts the orderer if the patient's same body part has undergone CT within the past 90 days. The study cohort included all 28,420 CT orders triggering a repeat alert in 2010. The intervention required clinical justification, selected from a predetermined menu, to override repeat CT decision support alerts to place a CT order; otherwise the order could not be placed and was dropped. The primary outcome, dropped repeat CT orders, was analyzed using three methods: chi-square tests to compare proportions dropped before and after intervention; multiple logistic regression tests to control for orderer, care setting, and patient factors; and statistical process control for temporal trends., Results: The repeat CT order drop rate had an absolute increase of 1.4%; 6.1% (682/11,230) before to 7.5% (1290/17,190) after intervention, which was a 23% relative change (7.5 - 6.1)/6.1 × 100 = 23%; p < 0.0001). Orders were dropped more often after intervention (odds ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1-1.4; p < 0.0001). Statistical control analysis supported the association between the increase in the drop rate with intervention rather than underlying trends., Conclusion: Adding a requirement for clinical justification to override alerts modestly but significantly improves the impact of repeat CT decision support (23% relative change), with the overall effect of preventing one in 13 repeat CT orders.

The paper reviews the problem of using structured radiology reports. Their salient features are as follows: to work out a protocol in accordance with some pattern, to divide it into subheadings arranged consecutively and logically and broken down by main anatomical structures, types of disease, and study, and to use standardized terminology. The RSNA proposed RadLex system is the most known example of structured reports. The experience in using these protocols has shown that the latter may improve the clearness and informative value of roentgenologists' opinions and alleviate their understanding by physicians of other specialties. However, the systems of writing the structured radiology reports have a number of constraints for the time being, which interfere with their wide clinical introduction. Nonetheless, their use is substantially increasing in the years ahead.

Objective: The purposes of this article are to provide a brief overview of structured radiology reporting and to emphasize the anticipated benefits from a new generation of standardized interventional radiology procedure reports., Conclusion: Radiology reporting standards and tools have evolved to enable automated data integration from multiple institutions using structured templates. In interventional radiology, data aggregated into clinical, research and quality registries from enriched structured reports could firmly establish the interventional radiology value proposition.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare textual error rates and subtypes in radiology reports before and after implementation of department-wide structured reports. Randomly selected radiology reports that were generated following the implementation of department-wide structured reports were evaluated for textual errors by two radiologists. For each report, the text was compared to the corresponding audio file. Errors in each report were tabulated and classified. Error rates were compared to results from a prior study performed prior to implementation of structured reports. Calculated error rates included the average number of errors per report, average number of nongrammatical errors per report, the percentage of reports with an error, and the percentage of reports with a nongrammatical error. Identical versions of voice-recognition software were used for both studies. A total of 644 radiology reports were randomly evaluated as part of this study. There was a statistically significant reduction in the percentage of reports with nongrammatical errors (33 to 26%; p = 0.024). The likelihood of at least one missense omission error (omission errors that changed the meaning of a phrase or sentence) occurring in a report was significantly reduced from 3.5 to 1.2% (p = 0.0175). A statistically significant reduction in the likelihood of at least one comission error (retained statements from a standardized report that contradict the dictated findings or impression) occurring in a report was also observed (3.9 to 0.8%; p = 0.0007). Carefully constructed structured reports can help to reduce certain error types in radiology reports.

Historically, radiologists' official written reports have functionally been proprietary communications between radiologists and referring providers. Although never secret, these reports have traditionally been archived in the medical record, with tightly controlled access. Patients rarely viewed reports directly. As patient-centered care, transparent communication, and electronic archiving have converged, however, radiologists' reports, like many other medical record components, are increasingly accessible to patients via web-based "portals." Many radiologists harbor justified anxiety about whether and how radiology reports should change in response to these portals. Direct patient access to radiology reports raises several questions, including: who are reports really for, what is their essential purpose, what content should they include or omit, what limits should be placed on their accessibility, and what ethical and legal ramifications arise from the reports' unfettered accessibility. In this paper, we outline the challenges and opportunities that arise from direct patient access to radiology reports via web-based portals, and propose an approach to optimizing radiologists' reports in an era of enhanced transparency. We conclude that, in effect, the health information web portal is a "train which has left the station"; patient portals are a nationwide reality, and transparency is now a public and professional expectation. Radiologists urgently need to consider quality implications for their report writing in order to address the challenges these developments pose, and to best harness the potential benefits for patients and providers., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Picture archiving and communication systems (PACS) play a critical role in radiology. This paper presents the criteria important to PACS administrators for selecting a PACS. A set of criteria are identified and organized into an integrative hierarchical framework. Survey responses from 48 administrators are used to identify the relative weights of these criteria through an analytical hierarchy process. The five main dimensions for PACS selection in order of importance are system continuity and functionality, system performance and architecture, user interface for workflow management, user interface for image manipulation, and display quality. Among the subdimensions, the highest weights were assessed for security, backup, and continuity; tools for continuous performance monitoring; support for multispecialty images; and voice recognition/transcription. PACS administrators' preferences were generally in line with that of previously reported results for radiologists. Both groups assigned the highest priority to ensuring business continuity and preventing loss of data through features such as security, backup, downtime prevention, and tools for continuous PACS performance monitoring. PACS administrators' next high priorities were support for multispecialty images, image retrieval speeds from short-term and long-term storage, real-time monitoring, and architectural issues of compatibility and integration with other products. Thus, next to ensuring business continuity, administrators' focus was on issues that impact their ability to deliver services and support. On the other hand, radiologists gave high priorities to voice recognition, transcription, and reporting; structured reporting; and convenience and responsiveness in manipulation of images. Thus, radiologists' focus appears to be on issues that may impact their productivity, effort, and accuracy.

Providing patients and clinicians with self-contained PACS viewer on CD format is a common and necessary tool to share vital imaging data. However, to be useful, this tool should be reliable, robust, and convenient. Numerous PACS viewer options are available, often without empirical data to guide in choosing one for routine use. To assist in making a standardized choice for our institution, we chose four common viewers, benchmarked on four different workstations reflecting the variety of environments used by non-radiologist clinicians who would receive a CD. Four CD-based DICOM viewers from eFilm, Philips, Pacsgear Gearview, and iSite were examed on two radiology PACS workstations, a standard desktop computer, and a laptop using a test case consisting of a multi-series CTA with 13 series and 3,035 total images. Multiple objective measures, subjective measures, and presence of key features were evaluated including program time to load, image time to load, cine/movie mode, ability to adequately window and level, pan and zoom functionality, basic measurement tools, and perceived lag when scrolling through a multi-image series. Substantial differences in speed of operation and behavior on multiple systems were documented, which could potentially add several minutes to the time required to open and view a patient's imaging data. The eFilm and iSite viewers operated consistently and reliably across all tested computer environments. The iSite viewer, having among the quickest load times in the group tested and consistently low subjective scroll lag during series viewing, and also beneficially allowing partial viewing while images load in the background, was found to generate the best overall user experience. Because of these significant differences, we have recommended that our institution standardize all patient imaging CD creation using the iSite viewer.

Purpose: To investigate the geometry of the clavicle and to assess the reliability of Picture Archiving Communication System (PACS) for its measurement., Methods: One hundred pairs of dry clavicles from 78 males and 22 females were measured on radiographs using PACS. Measurements included all of the following parameters: length, width, medial and lateral angulation. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for the inter-observer and intra-observer reliability was calculated., Results: The mean left clavicle length among males and females was 149.25 ± 9.64 and 133.30 ± 8.32 mm, respectively. The respective mean right clavicle length among the males and females was 147.77 ± 9.99 and 132.08 ± 6.92 mm. The clavicles from male cadavers were significantly longer, wider and thicker than those from females, on both the left and right (P < 0.05). Among both the male and female clavicles, the left side was significantly longer than the right (P < 0.05). There was good to excellent intra-observer reliability (ICC > 0.70) for all parameters. Inter-observer reliability was also found good to excellent for all parameters except for medial clavicular angulation; for which there was fair reliability (ICC = 0.697)., Conclusion: The geometry of the clavicle is influenced by sex and side. Use of PACS as a measurement tool is reliable. Data from this study will be useful for pre-contouring plate or improving future designs of the anatomical plate of the clavicle.

Paging referring clinicians with imaging results is a frequently repeated "microtask" performed by practicing radiologists. Many institutions use online alpha-paging systems to provide this integral part of safe and efficient patient care. Although sending an alpha-page can often be accomplished within one minute, current tools may disrupt workflow by distracting users with a series of tedious mouse clicks. We describe the development, evaluation, and updates of a portable tool that sends alpha-pages to referring clinicians using two keystrokes. This software integrates study information obtained from the Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS) with an existing hospital paging system.

Purpose: Breast density categorization consistency is important when performing research, and minimization of interoperator and intraoperator variability is essential. This research aimed to validate a set of mammography images for visual breast density estimation to achieve consistency in future research projects and to determine observer performance., Methods: Using the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) as the visual grading scale, 50 mammography images were scored for density grade by 8 observers., Results: Six of 8 observers achieved near-complete intraobserver agreement (kappa > 0.81). Strong agreement among observers (kappa = 0.61-0.8) was found in 10 of 28 paired observation episodes on the first iteration and 12 of 28 on the second. No observers demonstrated a delta variance above 1. Fleiss' kappa was used to evaluate concordance among all observers on the first and second iterations (first iteration, 0.64; second iteration, 0.56)., Discussion: This research illustrates the difficulties of comparing observer visual performance scores because differences can exist when studies are repeated by and among individuals., Conclusion: We confirmed that the 50 images were suitable for research purposes. Some variability existed among observers; however, overall density classification agreement was strong. Future research should include repeating this study with digitally acquired images.

Objective: The CT Colonography Reporting and Data System (C-RADS) is a well-recognized standard for reporting findings at CT colonography (CTC). However, few data on benchmark values for clinical performance have been published to date, especially for screening. The purpose of this study was to establish baseline C-RADS values for CTC screening., Subjects and Methods: From 2005 to 2011, 6769 asymptomatic adults (3110 men and 3659 women) 50-79 years old (mean [± SD] age, 56.7 ± 6.1 years) were enrolled for first-time CTC screening at a single center. CTC results were prospectively classified according to C-RADS for both colorectal and extracolonic findings. C-RADS classification rates and outcomes for positive patients were analyzed., Results: C-RADS classification rates for colorectal evaluation were C0 (0.7%), C1 (85.0%), C2 (8.6%), C3 (5.2%), and C4 (0.6%). Overall, 14.3% of subjects were positive (C2-C4), and positive findings were more frequent among men (17.5%) than women (11.6%; p < 0.0001). Positivity also increased with age, from 13.4% of patients 50-64 years old to 21.8% of patients 65-79 years old (p < 0.0001). Regarding extracolonic evaluation, 86.6% of patients were either negative for extracolonic findings or had unimportant extracolonic findings (E1 or E2). Likely unimportant but indeterminate extracolonic findings where further workup might be indicated (E3) were found in 11.3% of patients, whereas 2.1% had likely important extracolonic findings (E4). Overall, E3 and E4 rates were increased for older (p < 0.0001) and female (p = 0.008) cohorts., Conclusion: C-RADS results from our initial experience with CTC screening may serve as an initial benchmark for program comparison and quality assurance measures.

Structured reporting, created when a standardized template with organized subheadings is combined with relevant observations of a diagnostic study into a meaningful result, has the potential to raise both the quality and the predictability of the radiologist report, revolutionizing the workflow and its outcomes. These templates contain great value, as they carve a path based on best practice for the radiologist to follow, and thus should be shared, reviewed, and improved. Unfortunately, these templates are often not shareable today due to a lack of standards for describing and transporting templates. This paper outlines and discusses an appropriate and effective electronic method for transporting radiology report templates using of the style of representational state transfer (REST). Enabling a structured radiology report template library with REST enables just-in-time accessibility of templates, achieving efficiencies and effectiveness.

The ACR formed the Actionable Reporting Work Group to address the potential role of IT in the communication of imaging findings, especially in cases that require nonroutine communication because of the urgency of the findings or their unexpected nature. These findings that require special communication with referring clinicians are classified as "actionable findings." The work group defines 3 categories of actionable findings that require, respectively, communication and clinical decision within minutes (category 1), hours (category 2), or days (category 3). Although the work group does not believe that there can be definitive lists of such findings, it developed lists in each category that would apply in most general hospital settings. For each category, the work group discusses ways in which IT can assist interpreting radiologists in successfully communicating to the relevant clinicians to ensure optimal patient care. IT systems can also help document the communication and facilitate auditing of the documentation. The work group recommends that vendors develop platforms that can be customized on the basis of local preferences and needs. Whatever system is used, it should be highly reliable and fit seamlessly into radiologists' workflow., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The naming of imaging procedures is currently not standardized across institutions. As a result, it is a challenge to establish national registries, for instance, a national registry of dose to facilitate comparisons among different types of CT procedures. RSNA's RadLex Playbook is an effort towards addressing this gap (by introducing a unique Playbook identifier called an RPID for each procedure), and the current research focuses on semi-automatically mapping institution-specific procedure descriptions to Playbook entries to assist with this standardization effort. We discuss an algorithm we have developed to facilitate the mapping process which first extracts RadLex codes from the procedure description and then uses the definition of an RPID to determine the most suitable RPID(s) for the extracted set of RadLex codes. We also developed a tool that has three modes of operations-a single procedure mapping mode that allows a user to map a single institution-specific procedure description to a Playbook entry, a bulk mode to process large number of descriptions, and an exploratory mode that assists a user to better understand how the selection of values for various Playbook attributes affects the resulting RPID. We validate our algorithms using 166 production CT procedure descriptions and discuss how the tool can be used by administrators to map institution-specific procedure descriptions to RPIDs.

The updated American College of Radiology (ACR) Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) has been newly released. This article summarizes the changes and updates that have been made to BI-RADS. The goal of the revised edition continues to be the same: to improve clarification in image interpretation, maintain reporting standardization, and simplify the monitoring of outcomes. The new BI-RADS also introduces new terminology to provide a more universal lexicon across all 3 imaging modalities., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The analysis of literature data showed that the creation and implementation of a new form of radiology reports into clinical practice is an actual problem of modern medicine. Although imaging modalities have undergone dramatic evolution over the past century, radiology reporting has remained largely static, in both content and structure. In recent years the necessity to create a structured reporting is widely discussed in the literature. A universal format of radiology report hasn't been found yet. The standard of reporting system is absent, a wide variety of styles in radiology reporting currently exists. The challenging goal is improvement of existing protocols and creation of a new form of radiology reports--the protocols of the future.

Objective: The purpose of this quality improvement initiative was to improve the consistency with which radiologists are provided a complete clinical history when interpreting radiography examinations performed in the outpatient and emergency department settings., Materials and Methods: The clinical history was considered complete if it contained three elements: nature of the symptoms, description of injury, or cause for clinical concern; duration of symptoms or time of injury; and focal site of pain or abnormality, if applicable. This was reduced to three elements: "what-when-where." A goal was established that 95% of the clinical histories should contain all three elements. To achieve this goal, technologists supplemented referring clinicians' history. The project was divided into four phases: launch, support, transition to sustainability, and maintenance. During the support phase, results of automated weekly audits automatically populated group-level performance reports. During the transition to the sustainability phase, audit results populated individual-level performance reports. During the maintenance phase, quarterly audit results were incorporated into technologists' employee performance goals., Results: Before initiation of the project, 38% (76/200) of radiography examinations were accompanied by a complete clinical history. This increased to 92% (928/1006) by the end of the 15-week improvement phase. Performance was sustained at 96% (1168/1213) 7 months later [corrected]., Conclusion: By clearly defining expectations for an appropriate clinical history and establishing system and organizational mechanisms to facilitate verifiable compliance, we were able to successfully and sustainably improve the consistency with which radiography examinations were accompanied by a complete clinical history.

Rationale and Objectives: The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) can enhance communication between radiologists and clinicians if applied consistently. We identified an institutional need to improve liver imaging report standardization and developed handheld and desktop software to serve this purpose., Materials and Methods: We developed two complementary applications that implement the LI-RADS schema. A mobile application for iOS devices written in the Objective-C language allows for rapid characterization of hepatic observations under a variety of circumstances. A desktop application written in the Java language allows for comprehensive observation characterization and standardized report text generation. We chose the applications' languages and feature sets based on the computing resources of target platforms, anticipated usage scenarios, and ease of application installation, deployment, and updating., Results: Our primary results are the publication of the core source code implementing the LI-RADS algorithm and the availability of the applications for use worldwide via our website, http://www.liradsapp.com/. The Java application is free open-source software that can be integrated into nearly any vendor's reporting system. The iOS application is distributed through Apple's iTunes App Store. Observation categorizations of both programs have been manually validated to be correct. The iOS application has been used to characterize liver tumors during multidisciplinary conferences of our institution, and several faculty members, fellows, and residents have adopted the generated text of Java application into their diagnostic reports., Conclusions: Although these two applications were developed for the specific reporting requirements of our liver tumor service, we intend to apply this development model to other diseases as well. Through semiautomated structured report generation and observation characterization, we aim to improve patient care while increasing radiologist efficiency., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Rationale and Objectives: RadLex is a standardized vocabulary developed for clinical practice, research, and education in radiology. This report sought to analyze the use of RadLex to annotate and index the captions of images from the peer-reviewed biomedical literature and to compare the number of annotations per term for RadLex and five other biomedical ontologies in a large corpus of figure captions from biomedical imaging publications., Materials and Methods: RadLex and five other biomedical vocabularies were evaluated. A fully automated web service was used to discover the vocabularies' terms in a collection of 385,018 figure captions from 613 peer-reviewed biomedical journals. Annotations (i.e., figure-term pairs) were analyzed by vocabulary. RadLex annotations were analyzed by journal and RadLex term class., Results: RadLex had the greatest number of annotations per term of the six vocabularies. On average, there were 10.1 RadLex annotations per figure; 380,338 figures (98.8%) were annotated with at least one RadLex term and 288,163 figures (74.8%) were annotated with six or more RadLex terms. Of 39,218 RadLex terms, 8504 (21.7%) were mapped to images in the collection, which was the highest percentage of any of the vocabularies., Conclusions: Although comprising four to 10 times fewer terms than other vocabularies, RadLex showed excellent performance in indexing radiology-centric content. Almost all of the images in a large collection of figures from peer-reviewed biomedical journals were annotated with at least one RadLex term, and almost 75% of the images were annotated with six or more terms., (Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier Inc.)