Dataset Information

Structured reporting of computed tomography in the polytrauma patient assessment: a Delphi consensus proposal.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To develop a structured reporting (SR) template for whole-body CT examinations of polytrauma patients, based on the consensus of a panel of emergency radiology experts from the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology.

Methods

A multi-round Delphi method was used to quantify inter-panelist agreement for all SR sections. Internal consistency for each section and quality analysis in terms of average inter-item correlation were evaluated by means of the Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient.

Results

The final SR form included 118 items (6 in the "Patient Clinical Data" section, 4 in the "Clinical Evaluation" section, 9 in the "Imaging Protocol" section, and 99 in the "Report" section). The experts' overall mean score and sum of scores were 4.77 (range 1-5) and 257.56 (range 206-270) in the first Delphi round, and 4.96 (range 4-5) and 208.44 (range 200-210) in the second round, respectively. In the second Delphi round, the experts' overall mean score was higher than in the first round, and standard deviation was lower (3.11 in the second round vs 19.71 in the first round), reflecting a higher expert agreement in the second round. Moreover, Cα was higher in the second round than in the first round (0.97 vs 0.87).

Conclusions

Our SR template for whole-body CT examinations of polytrauma patients is based on a strong agreement among panel experts in emergency radiology and could improve communication between radiologists and the trauma team.

SUBMITTER: Granata V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9938818 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Structured reporting of computed tomography in the polytrauma patient assessment: a Delphi consensus proposal.

Granata Vincenza V Fusco Roberta R Cozzi Diletta D Danti Ginevra G Faggioni Lorenzo L Buccicardi Duccio D Prost Roberto R Ferrari Riccardo R Trinci Margherita M Galluzzo Michele M Iacobellis Francesca F Scaglione Mariano M Tonerini Michele M Coppola Francesca F Bortolotto Chandra C Caruso Damiano D Ciaghi Eleonora E Gabelloni Michela M Rengo Marco M Giacobbe Giuliana G Grassi Francesca F Romano Luigia L Pinto Antonio A Caranci Ferdinando F Bertelli Elena E D'Andrea Paolo P Neri Emanuele E Giovagnoni Andrea A Grassi Roberto R Miele Vittorio V

La Radiologia medica 20230119 2

<h4>Objectives</h4>To develop a structured reporting (SR) template for whole-body CT examinations of polytrauma patients, based on the consensus of a panel of emergency radiology experts from the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology.<h4>Methods</h4>A multi-round Delphi method was used to quantify inter-panelist agreement for all SR sections. Internal consistency for each section and quality analysis in terms of average inter-item correlation were evaluated by means of the Cron ...[more]

PMID: 36658367

Similar Datasets

Project description:Structured reporting (SR) in radiology is becoming increasingly necessary and has been recognized recently by major scientific societies. This study aims to build structured CT-based reports for lymphoma patients during the staging phase to improve communication between radiologists, members of multidisciplinary teams, and patients. A panel of expert radiologists, members of the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM), was established. A modified Delphi process was used to develop the SR and to assess a level of agreement for all report sections. The Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was used to assess internal consistency for each section and to measure quality analysis according to the average inter-item correlation. The final SR version was divided into four sections: (a) Patient Clinical Data, (b) Clinical Evaluation, (c) Imaging Protocol, and (d) Report, including n = 13 items in the "Patient Clinical Data" section, n = 8 items in the "Clinical Evaluation" section, n = 9 items in the "Imaging Protocol" section, and n = 32 items in the "Report" section. Overall, 62 items were included in the final version of the SR. A dedicated section of significant images was added as part of the report. In the first Delphi round, all sections received more than a good rating (≥3). The overall mean score of the experts and the sum of score for structured report were 4.4 (range 1-5) and 1524 (mean value of 101.6 and standard deviation of 11.8). The Cα correlation coefficient was 0.89 in the first round. In the second Delphi round, all sections received more than an excellent rating (≥4). The overall mean score of the experts and the sum of scores for structured report were 4.9 (range 3-5) and 1694 (mean value of 112.9 and standard deviation of 4.0). The Cα correlation coefficient was 0.87 in this round. The highest overall means value, highest sum of scores of the panelists, and smallest standard deviation values of the evaluations in this round reflect the increase of the internal consistency and agreement among experts in the second round compared to first round. The accurate statement of imaging data given to referring physicians is critical for patient care; the information contained affects both the decision-making process and the subsequent treatment. The radiology report is the most important source of clinical imaging information. It conveys critical information about the patient's health and the radiologist's interpretation of medical findings. It also communicates information to the referring physicians and records this information for future clinical and research use. The present SR was generated based on a multi-round consensus-building Delphi exercise and uses standardized terminology and structures, in order to adhere to diagnostic/therapeutic recommendations and facilitate enrolment in clinical trials, to reduce any ambiguity that may arise from non-conventional language, and to enable better communication between radiologists and clinicians.

Project description:BackgroundStructured reporting (SR) in radiology is becoming increasingly necessary and has been recognized recently by major scientific societies. This study aims to build structured CT-based reports in colon cancer during the staging phase in order to improve communication between the radiologist, members of multidisciplinary teams and patients.Materials and methodsA panel of expert radiologists, members of the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology, was established. A modified Delphi process was used to develop the SR and to assess a level of agreement for all report sections. Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was used to assess internal consistency for each section and to measure quality analysis according to the average inter-item correlation.ResultsThe final SR version was built by including n = 18 items in the "Patient Clinical Data" section, n = 7 items in the "Clinical Evaluation" section, n = 9 items in the "Imaging Protocol" section and n = 29 items in the "Report" section. Overall, 63 items were included in the final version of the SR. Both in the first and second round, all sections received a higher than good rating: a mean value of 4.6 and range 3.6-4.9 in the first round; a mean value of 5.0 and range 4.9-5 in the second round. In the first round, Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was a questionable 0.61. In the first round, the overall mean score of the experts and the sum of scores for the structured report were 4.6 (range 1-5) and 1111 (mean value 74.07, STD 4.85), respectively. In the second round, Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was an acceptable 0.70. In the second round, the overall mean score of the experts and the sum of score for structured report were 4.9 (range 4-5) and 1108 (mean value 79.14, STD 1.83), respectively. The overall mean score obtained by the experts in the second round was higher than the overall mean score of the first round, with a lower standard deviation value to underline greater agreement among the experts for the structured report reached in this round.ConclusionsA wide implementation of SR is of critical importance in order to offer referring physicians and patients optimum quality of service and to provide researchers with the best quality data in the context of big data exploitation of available clinical data. Implementation is a complex procedure, requiring mature technology to successfully address the multiple challenges of user-friendliness, organization and interoperability.

Project description:BackgroundStructured reporting (SR) in radiology is becoming increasingly necessary and has been recognized recently by major scientific societies. This study aims to build structured CT-based reports in Neuroendocrine Neoplasms during the staging phase in order to improve communication between the radiologist and members of multidisciplinary teams.Materials and methodsA panel of expert radiologists, members of the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology, was established. A Modified Delphi process was used to develop the SR and to assess a level of agreement for all report sections. Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was used to assess internal consistency for each section and to measure quality analysis according to the average inter-item correlation.ResultsThe final SR version was built by including n=16 items in the "Patient Clinical Data" section, n=13 items in the "Clinical Evaluation" section, n=8 items in the "Imaging Protocol" section, and n=17 items in the "Report" section. Overall, 54 items were included in the final version of the SR. Both in the first and second round, all sections received more than a good rating: a mean value of 4.7 and range of 4.2-5.0 in the first round and a mean value 4.9 and range of 4.9-5 in the second round. In the first round, the Cα correlation coefficient was a poor 0.57: the overall mean score of the experts and the sum of scores for the structured report were 4.7 (range 1-5) and 728 (mean value 52.00 and standard deviation 2.83), respectively. In the second round, the Cα correlation coefficient was a good 0.82: the overall mean score of the experts and the sum of scores for the structured report were 4.9 (range 4-5) and 760 (mean value 54.29 and standard deviation 1.64), respectively.ConclusionsThe present SR, based on a multi-round consensus-building Delphi exercise following in-depth discussion between expert radiologists in gastro-enteric and oncological imaging, derived from a multidisciplinary agreement between a radiologist, medical oncologist and surgeon in order to obtain the most appropriate communication tool for referring physicians.

Project description:Structured reporting (SR) in radiology has been recognized recently by major scientific societies. This study aims to build structured computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR)-based reports in pancreatic adenocarcinoma during the staging phase in order to improve communication between the radiologist and members of multidisciplinary teams. A panel of expert radiologists, members of the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology, was established. A modified Delphi process was used to develop the CT-SR and MRI-SR, assessing a level of agreement for all report sections. Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was used to assess internal consistency for each section and to measure quality analysis according to the average inter-item correlation. The final CT-SR version was built by including n = 16 items in the "Patient Clinical Data" section, n = 11 items in the "Clinical Evaluation" section, n = 7 items in the "Imaging Protocol" section, and n = 18 items in the "Report" section. Overall, 52 items were included in the final version of the CT-SR. The final MRI-SR version was built by including n = 16 items in the "Patient Clinical Data" section, n = 11 items in the "Clinical Evaluation" section, n = 8 items in the "Imaging Protocol" section, and n = 14 items in the "Report" section. Overall, 49 items were included in the final version of the MRI-SR. In the first round for CT-SR, all sections received more than a good rating. The overall mean score of the experts was 4.85. The Cα correlation coefficient was 0.85. In the second round, the overall mean score of the experts was 4.87, and the Cα correlation coefficient was 0.94. In the first round, for MRI-SR, all sections received more than a good rating. The overall mean score of the experts was 4.73. The Cα correlation coefficient was 0.82. In the second round, the overall mean score of the experts was 4.91, and the Cα correlation coefficient was 0.93. The CT-SR and MRI-SR are based on a multi-round consensus-building Delphi exercise derived from the multidisciplinary agreement of expert radiologists in order to obtain more appropriate communication tools for referring physicians.

Project description:BackgroundIn biomedical research, it is often desirable to seek consensus among individuals who have differing perspectives and experience. This is important when evidence is emerging, inconsistent, limited, or absent. Even when research evidence is abundant, clinical recommendations, policy decisions, and priority-setting may still require agreement from multiple, sometimes ideologically opposed parties. Despite their prominence and influence on key decisions, consensus methods are often poorly reported. Our aim was to develop the first reporting guideline dedicated to and applicable to all consensus methods used in biomedical research regardless of the objective of the consensus process, called ACCORD (ACcurate COnsensus Reporting Document).Methods and findingsWe followed methodology recommended by the EQUATOR Network for the development of reporting guidelines: a systematic review was followed by a Delphi process and meetings to finalize the ACCORD checklist. The preliminary checklist was drawn from the systematic review of existing literature on the quality of reporting of consensus methods and suggestions from the Steering Committee. A Delphi panel (n = 72) was recruited with representation from 6 continents and a broad range of experience, including clinical, research, policy, and patient perspectives. The 3 rounds of the Delphi process were completed by 58, 54, and 51 panelists. The preliminary checklist of 56 items was refined to a final checklist of 35 items relating to the article title (n = 1), introduction (n = 3), methods (n = 21), results (n = 5), discussion (n = 2), and other information (n = 3).ConclusionsThe ACCORD checklist is the first reporting guideline applicable to all consensus-based studies. It will support authors in writing accurate, detailed manuscripts, thereby improving the completeness and transparency of reporting and providing readers with clarity regarding the methods used to reach agreement. Furthermore, the checklist will make the rigor of the consensus methods used to guide the recommendations clear for readers. Reporting consensus studies with greater clarity and transparency may enhance trust in the recommendations made by consensus panels.

Project description:In recent years, there has been a large-scale dissemination of guidelines in radiology in the form of Reporting & Data Systems (RADS). The use of iodinated contrast media (ICM) has a fundamental role in enhancing the diagnostic capabilities of computed tomography (CT) but poses certain risks. The scope of the present review is to summarize the current role of ICM only in clinical reporting guidelines for CT that have adopted the "RADS" approach, focusing on three specific questions per each RADS: (I) what is the scope of the scoring system; (II) how is ICM used in the scoring system; (III) what is the impact of ICM enhancement on the scoring. We analyzed the original articles for each of the latest versions of RADS that can be used in CT [PubMed articles between January, 2005 and March, 2023 in English and American College of Radiology (ACR) official website]. We found 14 RADS suitable for use in CT out of 28 RADS described in the literature. Four RADS were validated by the ACR: Colonography-RADS (C-RADS), Liver Imaging-RADS (LI-RADS), Lung CT Screening-RADS (Lung-RADS), and Neck Imaging-RADS (NI-RADS). One RADS was validated by the ACR in collaboration with other cardiovascular scientific societies: Coronary Artery Disease-RADS 2.0 (CAD-RADS). Nine RADS were proposed by other scientific groups: Bone Tumor Imaging-RADS (BTI-RADS), Bone‑RADS, Coronary Artery Calcium Data & Reporting System (CAC-DRS), Coronavirus Disease 2019 Imaging-RADS (COVID-RADS), COVID-19-RADS (CO-RADS), Interstitial Lung Fibrosis Imaging-RADS (ILF-RADS), Lung-RADS (LU-RADS), Node-RADS, and Viral Pneumonia Imaging-RADS (VP-RADS). This overview suggests that ICM is not strictly necessary for the study of bones and calcifications (CAC-DRS, BTI-RADS, Bone-RADS), lung parenchyma (Lung-RADS, LU-RADS, COVID-RADS, CO-RADS, VP-RADS and ILF-RADS), and in CT colonography (C-RADS). On the other hand, ICM plays a key role in CT angiography (CAD-RADS), in the study of liver parenchyma (LI-RADS), and in the evaluation of soft tissues and lymph nodes (NI-RADS, Node-RADS). Future studies are needed in order to evaluate the impact of the new iodinated and non-iodinate contrast media, artificial intelligence tools and dual energy CT in the assignment of RADS scores.

Dataset Information

Structured reporting of computed tomography in the polytrauma patient assessment: a Delphi consensus proposal.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Structured reporting of computed tomography in the polytrauma patient assessment: a Delphi consensus proposal.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets