Audit of radiology reports of patients with neoplasms performed on computed tomography

Authors

  • Natalia Staver Department of radiology and medical imaging of “Nicolae Testemiţanu” State University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Chişinău, Republic of Moldova.
  • Natalia Rotaru Department of radiology and medical imaging of “Nicolae Testemiţanu” State University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Chişinău, Republic of Moldova.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30574/gscbps.2020.12.2.0254

Keywords:

Computed tomography, Oncology, Radiology report, Imaging management, Follow-up.

Abstract

Evaluation of the peculiarities of radiology reports of patients with neoplasms of the abdomen and pelvis to optimize clinical imaging management. The study included 104 patients, divided into two groups, experimental group (L2) and control group (L1), repeatedly investigated by computed tomography (CT) in 2009-2019, a total of 440 examinations, of which 120 prospective examinations and 320 retrospective examinations, aged between 25 and 85 years, with primary tumors of the abdomen and pelvis. Four specific descriptive criteria were analyzed from radiology reports and we obtained the following results: specification of the scanning protocols in radiology reports (0% for L1 and 95.3% for L2), specifying the reason for the examination in radiology reports (100% for L1 and 26.0% for L2), use of international terminology in radiology reports (0% for L1 and 74% for L2), patient follow-up in radiology reports (88.5% for L1 and 59.8 % for L2). Following the SWOT analysis of the radiology reports, we have developed a standardized model for describing CT images of patients with oncological pathologies of the abdomen and pelvis. The decision-making process was built on Strengths, eliminating Weaknesses, exploiting Opportunities and removing Threats.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

McLaughlin CP and Kaluzny AD. (2006). Continuous Quality Improvement in Health Care: Theory, Implementations and Applications, 3rd edition. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers Inc, 3-40.

Mosadeghrad AM. (2012). A conceptual framework for quality of care. Mater Sociomed, 24(4), 251-61.

Mosadeghrad AM. (2012).Towards a theory of quality management: an integration of strategic management, quality management and project management. International Journal of Modelling in Operations Management, 2, 89–118.

Donabedian A. (1980). The definition of quality and approaches to its assessment. Volume 1. Ann Arbor: Michigan Health Administration Press.

Donabedian A. (1988). The quality of care. How can it be assessed? JAMA, 260(12), 1743-8.

Rodney JH, Robert EW and Eddie WFL. (2006). PET/CT: will it change the way that we use CT in cancer imaging? Cancer Imaging, S52-62.

Downloads

Published

2022-02-04

How to Cite

Staver , N., & Rotaru , N. (2022). Audit of radiology reports of patients with neoplasms performed on computed tomography. GSC Biological and Pharmaceutical Sciences, 12(2), 153–160. https://doi.org/10.30574/gscbps.2020.12.2.0254

Issue

Section

Original Article