Skip to main content
main-content

15.12.2017 | Urogenital | Ausgabe 7/2018

European Radiology 7/2018

Structured vs narrative reporting of pelvic MRI for fibroids: clarity and impact on treatment planning

Zeitschrift:
European Radiology > Ausgabe 7/2018
Autoren:
Andrea Franconeri, Jieming Fang, Benjamin Carney, Almamoon Justaniah, Laura Miller, Hye-Chun Hur, Louise P. King, Roa Alammari, Salomao Faintuch, Koenraad J. Mortele, Olga R. Brook
Wichtige Hinweise

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00330-017-5161-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
A comment to this article is available online at https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00330-018-5417-z.

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate clarity and usefulness of MRI reporting of uterine fibroids using a structured disease-specific template vs. narrative reporting for planning of fibroid treatment by gynaecologists and interventional radiologists.

Methods

This is a HIPAA-compliant, IRB-approved study with waiver of informed consent. A structured reporting template for fibroid MRIs was developed in collaboration between gynaecologists, interventional and diagnostic radiologists. The study population included 29 consecutive women who underwent myomectomy for fibroids and pelvic MRI prior to implementation of structured reporting, and 42 consecutive women with MRI after implementation of structured reporting. Subjective evaluation (on a scale of 1-10, 0 not helpful; 10 extremely helpful) and objective evaluation for the presence of 19 key features were performed.

Results

More key features were absent in the narrative reports 7.3 ± 2.5 (range 3-12) than in structured reports 1.2 ± 1.5 (range 1-7), (p < 0.0001). Compared to narrative reports, gynaecologists and radiologists deemed structured reports both more helpful for surgical planning (p < 0.0001) (gynaecologists: 8.5 ± 1.2 vs. 5.7 ± 2.2; radiologists: 9.6 ± 0.6 vs. 6.0 ± 2.9) and easier to understand (p < 0.0001) (gynaecologists: 8.9 ± 1.1 vs. 5.8 ± 1.9; radiologists: 9.4 ± 1.3 vs. 6.3 ± 1.8).

Conclusion

Structured fibroid MRI reports miss fewer key features than narrative reports. Moreover, structured reports were described as more helpful for treatment planning and easier to understand.

Key Points

Structured reports missed only 1.2 ± 1.5 out of 19 key features, as compared to narrative reports that missed 7.3 ± 2.5 key features for planning of fibroid treatment.
Structured reports were more helpful and easier to understand by clinicians.
Structured template can provide essential information for fibroids treatment planning.

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

★ PREMIUM-INHALT
e.Med Interdisziplinär

Mit e.Med Interdisziplinär erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Fachzeitschriften auf SpringerMedizin.de.

Weitere Produktempfehlungen anzeigen
Zusatzmaterial
Nur für berechtigte Nutzer zugänglich
Literatur
Über diesen Artikel

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2018

European Radiology 7/2018 Zur Ausgabe
  1. Sie können e.Med Radiologie 14 Tage kostenlos testen (keine Print-Zeitschrift enthalten). Der Test läuft automatisch und formlos aus. Es kann nur einmal getestet werden.

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Mail Icon II Newsletter

Bestellen Sie unseren kostenlosen Newsletter Update Radiologie und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.

Bildnachweise