Structured reporting has the potential to reduce reporting times of dual-energy X-ray absorptionetry exams.
"Template-based structured reporting of DXA might lead to shorter reporting times and increased report quality. Reporting times were shorter for SRs in both radiology residents and medical students with median reporting times of 2.7 min (residents: 2.7, medical students: 2.7) for SRs and 6.1 min (residents: 5.0, medical students: 7.5) for FTRs. Information extraction was perceived to be significantly easier from SRs vs FTRs (P < 0.001)."
The use of structured reporting of head and neck ultrasound ensures time-efficiency and report quality during residency.
"The use of SRs of head and neck ultrasound studies results in an increased longitudinal time-efficiency while upholding the report quality at the same time. Superior outcomes in terms of comprehensiveness, legibility and time-efficiency can be observed immediately after implementation. Reports done using SR were finalized significantly faster (99.1 s vs. 115.0 s, p < 0.001) and user contentment was significantly better when using SRs (8.3 vs. 6.3, p < 0.001). In particular, only SRs showed a longitudinally increasing time efficiency (- 20.1 s, p = 0.036) while maintaining consistent completeness ratings."
Structured reporting of CT examinations in acute pulmonary embolism.
"Referring clinicians perceive structured CTPA reports as superior in clarity. Pulmonologists also appreciate structured reports as providing better content and clinical utility. Overall, SR received higher ratings for content (median rating 10.0 vs. 8.5, p < 0.0001) and clarity (median rating 10.0 vs. 8.0). The clinical utility of radiology reports improved with SR overall (p = 0.004) and for pulmonologists (p = 0.0005)."
Structured Reporting of Rectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Suspected Primary Rectal Cancer: Potential Benefits for Surgical Planning and Interdisciplinary Communication.
"SR of rectal MRI in patients with rectal cancer facilitates surgical planning and leads to a higher satisfaction level of referring surgeons in comparison to FT reports. Abdominal surgeons were more confident about report correctness and further clinical decision making on the basis of SRs. SR achieved significantly higher satisfaction rates with report content and clarity, and included significantly more of the 13 predefined key features compared with FT reports (SRs: mean ± SD, 12.2 ± 4.6 [range, 9-13] versus FT reports: mean ± SD, 9.2 ± 10.8 [range, 5-13]) (P < 0.001)."
