Journal club: Renal masses detected at abdominal CT: radiologists' adherence to guidelines regarding management recommendations and communication of critical results.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess radiologists' adherence to published guidelines for managing renal masses detected at abdominal CT at one institution and to a critical results communication policy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A validated natural language processing tool supplemented by manual review was used to randomly assemble a cohort of 97 radiology reports from all abdominal CT reports (n = 11,952) generated from July 2010 to June 2011. Critical renal mass findings warranted consideration for surgery, intervention, or imaging follow-up and required direct, separate, and timely communication to the referrer in addition to the radiology report. Primary outcomes were adherence to guidelines and institutional policy for communicating critical results. Sample size allowed a 95% CI ± 5% for primary outcome. Pearson chi-square test was performed to assess whether radiology subspecialization was predictive of the primary outcome.

RESULTS

Of all abdominal CT reports, 35.6% contained at least one renal mass finding (4.3% critical). Guideline adherence was lower for patients with critical than for those with noncritical findings (48/57 [84.2%] vs 40/40 [100%]; p = 0.01). Adherence to critical result communication policy was 73.7% (42/57). For critical findings, abdominal radiologists had higher guideline adherence (40/43 [93.0%] vs 8/14 [57.1%]; p = 0.001) and critical result communication policy adherence (36/43 [83.7%] vs 6/14 [42.9%]; p = 0.002) than nonabdominal radiologists.

CONCLUSION

In reporting renal masses detected at abdominal CT, radiologists largely adhered to management guidelines but did not adhere to the critical results communication policy in one of four reports. Subspecialization improved adherence to both management guidelines and the institution's critical result communication policy.