Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Holman, B. L.
Right arrow Articles by Fener, E. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Holman, B. L.
Right arrow Articles by Fener, E. F.

Radiology, Vol 191, 519-521, Copyright © 1994 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Medical impact of unedited preliminary radiology reports

BL Holman, P Aliabadi, SG Silverman, BN Weissman, LE Rudolph and EF Fener
Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115.

PURPOSE: To determine the potential frequency of adverse patient outcomes resulting from erroneous preliminary radiology reports. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The authors determined the number of preliminary radiology reports that changed substantively between the preliminary and final version during a 10-day collection period. They analyzed 200 of 1,648 reports to determine the potential for adverse outcome. RESULTS: Only 5.6% of the preliminary radiology reports were changed substantively. Two percent of all reports contained changes that would have led to additional testing or treatment and, possibly, increased morbidity. CONCLUSION: Immediate electronic transfer of a preliminary radiology report results in a small but important number of adverse outcomes; however, if a final edited report follows within 24 hours and referring physicians are called whenever the preliminary report contains erroneous information, the benefits of rapid information transmission may outweigh the additional risks.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 RadiologyHome page
G. P. Krestin, J. C. Miller, S. J. Golding, G. G. Frija, G. M. Glazer, H. G. Ringertz, and J. H. Thrall
Reinventing Radiology in a Digital and Molecular Age: Summary of Proceedings of the Sixth Biannual Symposium of the International Society for Strategic Studies in Radiology (IS3R), August 25 27, 2005
Radiology, September 1, 2007; 244(3): 633 - 638.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
C. P. Langlotz
Automatic Structuring of Radiology Reports: Harbinger of a Second Information Revolution in Radiology
Radiology, July 1, 2002; 224(1): 5 - 7.
[Full Text]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
F. M. Hall
Language of the Radiology Report: Primer for Residents and Wayward Radiologists
Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2000; 175(5): 1239 - 1242.
[Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1994 by the Radiological Society of North America.