Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Pediatric Radiology 4/2019

01.04.2019 | Minisymposium: Quality and safety

Practical considerations when implementing peer learning conferences

verfasst von: Anh-Vu Ngo, A. Luana Stanescu, David W. Swenson, Michael M. Moore, Raymond W. Sze, Ramesh S. Iyer

Erschienen in: Pediatric Radiology | Ausgabe 4/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Peer learning represents a shift away from traditional peer review. Peer learning focuses on improvement of diagnostic performance rather than on suboptimal performance. The shift in focus away from random selection and toward identification of cases with valuable teaching points can encourage more active radiologist engagement in the learning process. An effective peer learning program relies on a trusting environment that lessens the fear of embarrassment or punitive action. Here we describe the shortcomings of traditional peer review, and the benefits of peer learning. We also provide tips for a successful peer learning program and examples of implementation.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Quality of Health Care in America (2000) To err is human: building a safer health system. National Academies Press, Washington, DC Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Quality of Health Care in America (2000) To err is human: building a safer health system. National Academies Press, Washington, DC
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Halsted MJ (2004) Radiology peer review as an opportunity to reduce errors and improve patient care. J Am Coll Radiol 1:984–987CrossRefPubMed Halsted MJ (2004) Radiology peer review as an opportunity to reduce errors and improve patient care. J Am Coll Radiol 1:984–987CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Abujudeh H, Pyatt RS, Bruno MA et al (2014) RADPEER peer review: relevance, use, concerns, challenges, and direction forward. J Am Coll Radiol 11:899–904CrossRefPubMed Abujudeh H, Pyatt RS, Bruno MA et al (2014) RADPEER peer review: relevance, use, concerns, challenges, and direction forward. J Am Coll Radiol 11:899–904CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Goldberg-Stein S, Frigini LA, Long S et al (2017) ACR RADPEER committee white paper with 2016 updates: revised scoring system, new classifications, self-review, and subspecialized reports. J Am Coll Radiol 14:1080–1086CrossRefPubMed Goldberg-Stein S, Frigini LA, Long S et al (2017) ACR RADPEER committee white paper with 2016 updates: revised scoring system, new classifications, self-review, and subspecialized reports. J Am Coll Radiol 14:1080–1086CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Committee on Diagnostic Error in Health Care, Board on Health Care Services, Institute of Medicine et al (2015) Improving diagnosis in health care. National Academies Press, Washington, DC Committee on Diagnostic Error in Health Care, Board on Health Care Services, Institute of Medicine et al (2015) Improving diagnosis in health care. National Academies Press, Washington, DC
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Donnelly LF, Larson DB, Heller REIII, Kruskal JB (2018) Practical suggestions on how to move from peer review to peer learning. AJR Am J Roentgenol 210:578–582CrossRefPubMed Donnelly LF, Larson DB, Heller REIII, Kruskal JB (2018) Practical suggestions on how to move from peer review to peer learning. AJR Am J Roentgenol 210:578–582CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Larson DB, Donnelly LF, Podberesky DJ et al (2016) Peer feedback, learning, and improvement: answering the call of the institute of medicine report on diagnostic error. Radiology 283:231–241CrossRefPubMed Larson DB, Donnelly LF, Podberesky DJ et al (2016) Peer feedback, learning, and improvement: answering the call of the institute of medicine report on diagnostic error. Radiology 283:231–241CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Cascade PN (2004) Comment on “RADPEER quality assurance program: a multifacility study of interpretive disagreement rates.” J Am Coll Radiol 1:295–296 Cascade PN (2004) Comment on “RADPEER quality assurance program: a multifacility study of interpretive disagreement rates.” J Am Coll Radiol 1:295–296
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Eisenberg RL, Cunningham ML, Siewert B, Kruskal JB (2014) Survey of faculty perceptions regarding a peer review system. J Am Coll Radiol 11:397–401CrossRefPubMed Eisenberg RL, Cunningham ML, Siewert B, Kruskal JB (2014) Survey of faculty perceptions regarding a peer review system. J Am Coll Radiol 11:397–401CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Larson DB, Nance JJ (2011) Rethinking peer review: what aviation can teach radiology about performance improvement. Radiology 259:626–632CrossRefPubMed Larson DB, Nance JJ (2011) Rethinking peer review: what aviation can teach radiology about performance improvement. Radiology 259:626–632CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Borgstede JP, Lewis RS, Bhargavan M, Sunshine JH (2004) RADPEER quality assurance program: a multifacility study of interpretive disagreement rates. J Am Coll Radiol 1:59–65CrossRefPubMed Borgstede JP, Lewis RS, Bhargavan M, Sunshine JH (2004) RADPEER quality assurance program: a multifacility study of interpretive disagreement rates. J Am Coll Radiol 1:59–65CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Jackson VP, Cushing T, Abujudeh HH et al (2009) RADPEER scoring white paper. J Am Coll Radiol 6:21–25CrossRefPubMed Jackson VP, Cushing T, Abujudeh HH et al (2009) RADPEER scoring white paper. J Am Coll Radiol 6:21–25CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Ivers N, Jamtvedt G, Flottorp S et al (2012) Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 6:CD000259 Ivers N, Jamtvedt G, Flottorp S et al (2012) Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 6:CD000259
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Alkasab TK, Harvey HB, Gowda V et al (2014) Consensus-oriented group peer review: a new process to review radiologist work output. J Am Coll Radiol 11:131–138CrossRefPubMed Alkasab TK, Harvey HB, Gowda V et al (2014) Consensus-oriented group peer review: a new process to review radiologist work output. J Am Coll Radiol 11:131–138CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Kruskal JB, Eisenberg RL, Brook O, Siewert B (2016) Transitioning from peer review to peer learning for abdominal radiologists. Abdom Radiol N Y 41:416–428CrossRef Kruskal JB, Eisenberg RL, Brook O, Siewert B (2016) Transitioning from peer review to peer learning for abdominal radiologists. Abdom Radiol N Y 41:416–428CrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Grenville J, Doucette-Preville D, Vlachou PA et al (2016) Peer review in radiology: a resident and fellow perspective. J Am Coll Radiol 13:217–221.e3CrossRefPubMed Grenville J, Doucette-Preville D, Vlachou PA et al (2016) Peer review in radiology: a resident and fellow perspective. J Am Coll Radiol 13:217–221.e3CrossRefPubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Swanson JO, Thapa MM, Iyer RS et al (2012) Optimizing peer review: a year of experience after instituting a real-time comment-enhanced program at a children’s hospital. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198:1121–1125CrossRefPubMed Swanson JO, Thapa MM, Iyer RS et al (2012) Optimizing peer review: a year of experience after instituting a real-time comment-enhanced program at a children’s hospital. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198:1121–1125CrossRefPubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Stanescu AL, Parisi MT, Weinberger E et al (2016) Peer review: lessons learned in a pediatric radiology department. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 45:139–148CrossRefPubMed Stanescu AL, Parisi MT, Weinberger E et al (2016) Peer review: lessons learned in a pediatric radiology department. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 45:139–148CrossRefPubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Iyer RS, Swanson JO, Otto RK, Weinberger E (2013) Peer review comments augment diagnostic error characterization and departmental quality assurance: 1-year experience from a children’s hospital. AJR Am J Roentgenol 200:132–137CrossRefPubMed Iyer RS, Swanson JO, Otto RK, Weinberger E (2013) Peer review comments augment diagnostic error characterization and departmental quality assurance: 1-year experience from a children’s hospital. AJR Am J Roentgenol 200:132–137CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Practical considerations when implementing peer learning conferences
verfasst von
Anh-Vu Ngo
A. Luana Stanescu
David W. Swenson
Michael M. Moore
Raymond W. Sze
Ramesh S. Iyer
Publikationsdatum
01.04.2019
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Pediatric Radiology / Ausgabe 4/2019
Print ISSN: 0301-0449
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1998
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-018-4305-7

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2019

Pediatric Radiology 4/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Minisymposium: Quality and safety

Quality and safety in pediatric radiology

Endlich: Zi zeigt, mit welchen PVS Praxen zufrieden sind

IT für Ärzte Nachrichten

Darauf haben viele Praxen gewartet: Das Zi hat eine Liste von Praxisverwaltungssystemen veröffentlicht, die von Nutzern positiv bewertet werden. Eine gute Grundlage für wechselwillige Ärzte und Psychotherapeuten.

Akuter Schwindel: Wann lohnt sich eine MRT?

28.04.2024 Schwindel Nachrichten

Akuter Schwindel stellt oft eine diagnostische Herausforderung dar. Wie nützlich dabei eine MRT ist, hat eine Studie aus Finnland untersucht. Immerhin einer von sechs Patienten wurde mit akutem ischämischem Schlaganfall diagnostiziert.

Screening-Mammografie offenbart erhöhtes Herz-Kreislauf-Risiko

26.04.2024 Mammografie Nachrichten

Routinemäßige Mammografien helfen, Brustkrebs frühzeitig zu erkennen. Anhand der Röntgenuntersuchung lassen sich aber auch kardiovaskuläre Risikopatientinnen identifizieren. Als zuverlässiger Anhaltspunkt gilt die Verkalkung der Brustarterien.

S3-Leitlinie zu Pankreaskrebs aktualisiert

23.04.2024 Pankreaskarzinom Nachrichten

Die Empfehlungen zur Therapie des Pankreaskarzinoms wurden um zwei Off-Label-Anwendungen erweitert. Und auch im Bereich der Früherkennung gibt es Aktualisierungen.

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.