PDF herunterladen
Open Access
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Indian J Radiol Imaging 2021; 31(02): 333-344
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1734351
Original Article

Radiology Reporting Errors: Learning from Report Addenda

Autoren

  • Anurima Patra

    1   Department of Radiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India

  • Manthreshwar Premkumar

    1   Department of Radiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India

  • Shyamkumar N. Keshava

    1   Department of Radiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India

  • Anuradha Chandramohan

    1   Department of Radiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India

  • Elizabeth Joseph

    1   Department of Radiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India

  • Sridhar Gibikote

    1   Department of Radiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India
Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
  Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Background The addition of new information to a completed radiology report in the form of an “addendum” conveys a variety of information, ranging from less significant typographical errors to serious omissions and misinterpretations. Understanding the reasons for errors and their clinical implications will lead to better clinical governance and radiology practice.

Aims This article assesses the common reasons which lead to addenda generation to completed reports and their clinical implications.

Subjects and Methods Retrospective study was conducted by reviewing addenda to computed tomography (CT), ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging reports between January 2018 to June 2018, to note the frequency and classification of report addenda.

Results Rate of addenda generation was 1.1% (n = 1,076) among the 97,003 approved cross-sectional radiology reports. Errors contributed to 71.2% (n = 767) of addenda, most commonly communication (29.3%, n = 316) and observational errors (20.8%, n = 224), and 28.7% were nonerrors aimed at providing additional clinically relevant information. Majority of the addenda (82.3%, n = 886) did not have a significant clinical impact. CT and ultrasound reports accounted for 36.9% (n = 398) and 35.2% (n = 379) share, respectively. A time gap of 1 to 7 days was noted for 46.8% (n = 504) addenda and 37.6% (n = 405) were issued in less than a day. Radiologists with more than 6-year experience created majority (1.5%, n = 456) of addenda. Those which were added to reports generated during emergency hours contributed to 23.2% (n = 250) of the addenda.

Conclusion The study has identified the prevalence of report addenda in a radiology practice involving picture archiving and communication system in a tertiary care center in India. The etiology included both errors and non-errors. Results of this audit were used to generate a checklist and put protocols that will help decrease serious radiology misses and common errors.

Keywords

addenda - diagnostic error rate - misinterpretation - radiological discrepancy


Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
12. August 2021

© 2021. Indian Radiological Association. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd.
A-12, Second Floor, Sector -2, NOIDA -201301, India