Structured report for chest high-resolution computed tomography in patients with connective tissue disease: Impact on the report quality as perceived by referring clinicians. Issue 131 (October 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Cereser, L.; Marchesini, F.; Di Poi, E.; Sacco, S.; De Marchi, G.; Linda, A.; Como, G.; Zuiani, C.; Girometti, R.
• Is Part Of: European journal of radiology. Issue 131(2020)
• Publication Date: 2020-10
• Subjects: SR structured report -- NR narrative report -- CTD connective tissue diseases -- ILD interstitial lung diseases -- HRCT high-resolution computed tomography -- UIP usual interstitial pneumonia -- NSIP nonspecific interstitial pneumonia -- OP organizing pneumonia -- LIP lymphoid interstitial pneumonia -- DAD diffuse alveolar damage -- Rad1 radiologist 1 -- Rad2 radiologist 2 -- Rad3 radiologist 3 -- MPR multiplanar reconstruction -- MinIP minimum intensity projection -- MIP maximum intensity projection -- R1 rheumatologist 1 -- R2 rheumatologist 2 -- R3 rheumatologist 3 -- POCS position on a clinical spectrum -- IQR interquartile range -- SSc systemic sclerosis -- PM/DM polymyositis – dermatomyositis -- SLE systemic lupus erythematosus -- RA rheumatoid arthritis -- SS Sjögren syndrome -- MCTD mixed connective tissue disease; High-resolution computed tomography -- Connective tissue diseases -- Chest -- Structured reporting; Medical radiology -- Periodicals; Radiology -- Periodicals; Radiologie médicale -- Périodiques; Medical radiology; Periodicals; 616.075705
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109269
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0720-048X

Abstract

Highlights: Completeness and clarity are perceived as high in structured HRCT reports of CTD. Clinicians perceive high clinical relevance in structured HRCT reports of CTD. Clinicians preferred HRCT structured reports than narrative reports of CTD. Abstract: Rationale and Objectives: To evaluate the impact on perceived report quality of referring rheumatologists for a chest high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) structured report (SR) template for patients with connective tissue disease (CTD), compared to the traditional narrative report (NR). Materials and Methods: We retrospectively considered 123 HRCTs in patients with CTD. Three radiologists, blinded to the original NRs they wrote during clinical routine, re-reported each HRCT using an SR dedicated template. We then divided all NR-SR couples into three groups (41 HRCT each). Each group was evaluated by one of three rheumatologists (R1, R2, R3), who expressed their perceived report quality for the respective pools of NRs and SRs in terms of completeness, clarity (both on a 10-points scale), and clinical relevance (on a 5-points scale). The Wilcoxon test and the McNemar test were used for statistical analysis. Results: For each rheumatologist, SR received higher ratings compared to NR for completeness (median ratings: R1, 10 vs. 7; R2, 10 vs. 8; R3, 10 vs. 6, all p < 0.0001), clarity (median ratings: R1, 10 vs. 7; R2, 10 vs. 8; R3, 10 vs. 7, all p < 0.0001), and clinical relevance (median ratings: R1, 5 vs. 4; R2, 5 vs. 4; R3, 5 vs. 1, all p < 0.0001). After rating dichotomization, the use of SR led to a significant increase (p < 0.01) in completeness, clarity, and clinical relevance as compared to NR, except for clarity as perceived by R2 (p = 1). Conclusion: Referring rheumatologists' perceived report quality for structured reporting of HRCT in patients with CTD was superior to narrative reporting.