1 Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine.
2 Department of Internal Medicine.
Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2016 Oct;13(10):1704-1711. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201602-142OC.
Radiologist reports of pulmonary nodules discovered incidentally on computed tomographic (CT) images of the chest may influence subsequent evaluation and management.
We sought to determine the impact of the terminology used by radiologists to report incidental pulmonary nodules on subsequent documentation and evaluation of the nodules by the ordering or primary care provider.
We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with incidentally discovered pulmonary nodules detected on CT chest examinations performed during 2010 in a large urban safety net medical system located in northeastern Ohio.
Twelve different terms were used to describe 344 incidental pulmonary nodules. Most nodules (181 [53%]) were documented in a subsequent progress note by the provider, and 140 (41%) triggered subsequent clinical activity. In a multivariable analysis, incidental pulmonary nodules described in radiology reports using the terms density (odds ratio [OR], 0.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.47), granuloma (OR, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.01-0.65), or opacity (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01-0.68) were less likely to be documented by the provider than those that used the term mass. Patients with nodules described in radiology reports using the term nodule (OR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.02-0.99), nodular density (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01-0.63), granuloma (OR, 0.06; 95% CI, 0.01-0.69), or opacity (OR, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.01-0.43) were less likely to receive follow-up than were patients with nodules described using the term mass. The factor most strongly associated with follow-up of pulmonary nodules was documentation by the provider (OR, 5.85; 95% CI, 2.93-11.7).
Within one multifacility urban health system in the United States, the terms used by radiologists to describe incidental pulmonary nodules were associated with documentation of the nodule by the ordering physician and subsequent follow-up. Standard terminology should be used to describe pulmonary nodules to improve patient outcomes.
放射科医生报告在胸部计算机断层扫描(CT)图像上偶然发现的肺结节可能会影响后续评估和管理。
我们旨在确定放射科医生报告偶然发现的肺结节时使用的术语对医嘱或初级保健提供者对结节的后续记录和评估的影响。
我们对 2010 年在俄亥俄州东北部的一家大型城市医疗保健系统中进行的胸部 CT 检查偶然发现的肺结节患者进行了回顾性队列研究。
12 种不同的术语用于描述 344 个偶然发现的肺结节。大多数结节(181 个[53%])由提供者在随后的进展记录中记录,140 个(41%)引发了后续的临床活动。在多变量分析中,放射科报告中使用术语密度(比值比[OR],0.06;95%置信区间[CI],0.01-0.47)、肉芽肿(OR,0.07;95%CI,0.01-0.65)或不透明度(OR,0.09;95%CI,0.01-0.68)描述的偶然肺结节比使用术语质量的肺结节更不可能由提供者记录。放射科报告中使用术语结节(OR,0.15;95%CI,0.02-0.99)、结节密度(OR,0.09;95%CI,0.01-0.63)、肉芽肿(OR,0.06;95%CI,0.01-0.69)或不透明度(OR,0.05;95%CI,0.01-0.43)描述的结节患者不太可能接受随访,而使用术语质量描述的结节患者更有可能接受随访。与肺结节随访最密切相关的因素是医嘱提供者的记录(OR,5.85;95%CI,2.93-11.7)。
在美国一个多设施城市卫生系统中,放射科医生用来描述偶然发现的肺结节的术语与医嘱医生记录结节和随后的随访有关。应使用标准术语来描述肺结节,以改善患者的预后。