Critical Findings: Attempts at Reducing Notification Errors.
other · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 27567468.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1016/j.jacr.2016.06.049.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Ineffective communication of critical findings (CFs) is a patient safety issue. The aim of this study was to assess whether a feedback program for faculty members failing to correctly report CFs would lead to improved compliance. Fifty randomly selected reports were reviewed by the chief of neuroradiology each month for 42 months. Errors included (1) not calling for a CF, (2) not identifying a CF as such, (3) mischaracterizing non-CFs as CFs, and (4) calling for non-CFs. The number of appropriately handled and mishandled reports in each month was recorded. The trend of error reduction after the division chief provided feedback in the subsequent months was evaluated, and the equality of time interval between errors was tested. Among 2,100 reports, 49 (2.3%) were handled inappropriately. Among non-CF reports, 98.97% (1,817 of 1,836) were appropriately not called and not flagged, and 88.64% (234 of 264) of CF reports were called and flagged appropriately. The error rate during the 11th through 32nd months of review (1.28%) was significantly lower than the error rate in the first 10 months of review (3.98%) (P = .001). This benefit lasted for 21 months. Review and giving feedback to radiologists increased their compliance with the CF protocol and decreased deviations from standard operating procedures for about 2 years (from month 10 to month 32). Developing new ideas for improving CF policy compliance may be required at 2- to 3-year intervals to provide continuous quality improvement.
Medical subject headings
- Communication
- Diagnostic Errors
- Neuroimaging
- Quality Improvement