A Default Normal Chest CT Structured Reporting Field for Coronary Calcifications Does Not Cause Excessive False-Negative Reporting

William R. Walter, Shlomit A. Goldberg-Stein, Jeffrey M. Levsky, Hillel W. Cohen, Meir H. Scheinfeld

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of coronary atherosclerosis reporting before and after the implementation of a structured reporting chest CT template. Methods A noncardiac, noncontrast chest CT structured reporting template was developed and mandated for department-wide use at a large academic center. The template included the statement "There are no coronary artery calcifications." All noncardiac, noncontrast chest CT examinations reported over 3 days, 1 month after template implementation (structured template group), and from a 3-day period 1 year prior (control group) were retrospectively collected. Final radiology reports were reviewed and designated positive or negative for coronary calcifications. CT images were reviewed in consensus by 2 radiologists, who scored each case for the presence or absence of coronary calcifications, blinded to the original report. Statistical analysis was performed using Pearson χ<sup>2</sup> and Fisher exact tests. Results Sixty-five percent (69 of 106) of structured template group and 58% (62 of 106) of control group cases had coronary calcifications. Reports from the structured template group were more likely to correctly state the presence or absence of coronary atherosclerosis compared with those from the control group (96.2% vs 85.8%; odds ratio, 4.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-13.1; P =.008). Structured template group reports were less likely to be falsely negative compared with control group reports (3.8% vs 11.7%; odds ratio, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-10.8; P =.03). Conclusions Implementing a structured reporting template improves reporting accuracy of coronary calcifications.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)783-787
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of the American College of Radiology
Volume12
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2015

Fingerprint

Thorax
Control Groups
Coronary Artery Disease
Odds Ratio
Confidence Intervals
Radiology
Coronary Vessels

Keywords

  • coronary calcifications
  • report quality
  • Structured reporting

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

@article{6ea39b7ddacb4ccd80c1c55f524b10a2,
title = "A Default Normal Chest CT Structured Reporting Field for Coronary Calcifications Does Not Cause Excessive False-Negative Reporting",
abstract = "Purpose The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of coronary atherosclerosis reporting before and after the implementation of a structured reporting chest CT template. Methods A noncardiac, noncontrast chest CT structured reporting template was developed and mandated for department-wide use at a large academic center. The template included the statement {"}There are no coronary artery calcifications.{"} All noncardiac, noncontrast chest CT examinations reported over 3 days, 1 month after template implementation (structured template group), and from a 3-day period 1 year prior (control group) were retrospectively collected. Final radiology reports were reviewed and designated positive or negative for coronary calcifications. CT images were reviewed in consensus by 2 radiologists, who scored each case for the presence or absence of coronary calcifications, blinded to the original report. Statistical analysis was performed using Pearson χ2 and Fisher exact tests. Results Sixty-five percent (69 of 106) of structured template group and 58{\%} (62 of 106) of control group cases had coronary calcifications. Reports from the structured template group were more likely to correctly state the presence or absence of coronary atherosclerosis compared with those from the control group (96.2{\%} vs 85.8{\%}; odds ratio, 4.2; 95{\%} confidence interval, 1.3-13.1; P =.008). Structured template group reports were less likely to be falsely negative compared with control group reports (3.8{\%} vs 11.7{\%}; odds ratio, 3.4; 95{\%} confidence interval, 1.0-10.8; P =.03). Conclusions Implementing a structured reporting template improves reporting accuracy of coronary calcifications.",
keywords = "coronary calcifications, report quality, Structured reporting",
author = "Walter, {William R.} and Goldberg-Stein, {Shlomit A.} and Levsky, {Jeffrey M.} and Cohen, {Hillel W.} and Scheinfeld, {Meir H.}",
year = "2015",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jacr.2015.03.011",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "12",
pages = "783--787",
journal = "Journal of the American College of Radiology",
issn = "1558-349X",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Default Normal Chest CT Structured Reporting Field for Coronary Calcifications Does Not Cause Excessive False-Negative Reporting

AU - Walter, William R.

AU - Goldberg-Stein, Shlomit A.

AU - Levsky, Jeffrey M.

AU - Cohen, Hillel W.

AU - Scheinfeld, Meir H.

PY - 2015/8/1

Y1 - 2015/8/1

N2 - Purpose The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of coronary atherosclerosis reporting before and after the implementation of a structured reporting chest CT template. Methods A noncardiac, noncontrast chest CT structured reporting template was developed and mandated for department-wide use at a large academic center. The template included the statement "There are no coronary artery calcifications." All noncardiac, noncontrast chest CT examinations reported over 3 days, 1 month after template implementation (structured template group), and from a 3-day period 1 year prior (control group) were retrospectively collected. Final radiology reports were reviewed and designated positive or negative for coronary calcifications. CT images were reviewed in consensus by 2 radiologists, who scored each case for the presence or absence of coronary calcifications, blinded to the original report. Statistical analysis was performed using Pearson χ2 and Fisher exact tests. Results Sixty-five percent (69 of 106) of structured template group and 58% (62 of 106) of control group cases had coronary calcifications. Reports from the structured template group were more likely to correctly state the presence or absence of coronary atherosclerosis compared with those from the control group (96.2% vs 85.8%; odds ratio, 4.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-13.1; P =.008). Structured template group reports were less likely to be falsely negative compared with control group reports (3.8% vs 11.7%; odds ratio, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-10.8; P =.03). Conclusions Implementing a structured reporting template improves reporting accuracy of coronary calcifications.

AB - Purpose The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of coronary atherosclerosis reporting before and after the implementation of a structured reporting chest CT template. Methods A noncardiac, noncontrast chest CT structured reporting template was developed and mandated for department-wide use at a large academic center. The template included the statement "There are no coronary artery calcifications." All noncardiac, noncontrast chest CT examinations reported over 3 days, 1 month after template implementation (structured template group), and from a 3-day period 1 year prior (control group) were retrospectively collected. Final radiology reports were reviewed and designated positive or negative for coronary calcifications. CT images were reviewed in consensus by 2 radiologists, who scored each case for the presence or absence of coronary calcifications, blinded to the original report. Statistical analysis was performed using Pearson χ2 and Fisher exact tests. Results Sixty-five percent (69 of 106) of structured template group and 58% (62 of 106) of control group cases had coronary calcifications. Reports from the structured template group were more likely to correctly state the presence or absence of coronary atherosclerosis compared with those from the control group (96.2% vs 85.8%; odds ratio, 4.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-13.1; P =.008). Structured template group reports were less likely to be falsely negative compared with control group reports (3.8% vs 11.7%; odds ratio, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-10.8; P =.03). Conclusions Implementing a structured reporting template improves reporting accuracy of coronary calcifications.

KW - coronary calcifications

KW - report quality

KW - Structured reporting

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84938749712&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84938749712&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jacr.2015.03.011

DO - 10.1016/j.jacr.2015.03.011

M3 - Article

VL - 12

SP - 783

EP - 787

JO - Journal of the American College of Radiology

JF - Journal of the American College of Radiology

SN - 1558-349X

IS - 8

ER -