A Standardized Radiology Template Improves Incidental Adrenal Mass Follow-Up: A Prospective Effectiveness and Implementation Study.
prospective_cohort · Level II
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 36521629.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1016/j.jacr.2022.11.011 and PMC identifier 9898147.
- 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
Incidental adrenal masses (IAMs) are common but rarely evaluated. To improve this, we developed a standardized radiology report recommendation template and investigated its implementation and effectiveness. We prospectively studied implementation of a standardized IAM reporting template as part of an ongoing quality improvement initiative, which also included primary care provider (PCP) notifications and a straightforward clinical algorithm. Data were obtained via medical record review and a survey of radiologists. Outcomes included template adoption rates and acceptability (implementation measures), as well as the proportion of patients evaluated and time to follow-up (effectiveness outcomes). Of 4,995 imaging studies, 200 (4.0%) detected a new IAM. The standardized template was used in 54 reports (27.0%). All radiologists surveyed were aware of the template, and 91% affirmed that standardized recommendations are useful. Patients whose reports included the template were more likely to have PCP follow-up after IAM discovery compared with those with no template (53.7% versus 36.3%, P = .03). After adjusting for sex, current or prior malignancy, and provider ordering the initial imaging (PCP, other outpatient provider, or emergency department or inpatient provider), odds of PCP follow-up remained 2.0 times higher (95% confidence interval 1.02-3.9). Patients whose reports included the template had a shorter time to PCP follow-up (log-rank P = .018). PCPs ultimately placed orders for biochemical testing (35.2% versus 18.5%, P = .01), follow-up imaging (40.7% versus 23.3%, P = .02), and specialist referral (22.2% versus 4.8%, P < .01) for a higher proportion of patients who received the template compared with those who did not. Use of a standardized template to communicate IAM recommendations was associated with improved IAM evaluation. Our template demonstrated high acceptability, but additional strategies are necessary to optimize adoption.
Medical subject headings
- Incidental Findings
- Radiology