Hanley Owen, Lotfi Amir, Sanborn Tiara, Friderici Jennifer L, Fitzgerald Janice, Manikantan Poornima, Canty Linda, Stefan Mihaela S
From the Department of Medicine, Baystate Medical Center, Springfield, Massachusetts, Division of Hospital Medicine, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, Central Maine Medical Center, Lewiston, and Biological Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.
South Med J. 2017 Dec;110(12):770-774. doi: 10.14423/SMJ.0000000000000741.
Studies have found that recommendations for additional imaging (RAI) accompany up to 31% of index computed tomography (CT) scans. In this study we assessed the frequency with which recommendations are accepted by the referring physician and the impact of AI on case management.
We performed a cross-sectional study of all index CT scans of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis performed on adult inpatients during a 1-month period at a tertiary medical center. Each radiology report was examined for mention of RAI. We used a standardized abstraction tool to review medical records for the indication for the RAI (related to original diagnosis vs incidental finding), the clinician's rationale for pursuing or discarding the RAI, and the impact of the AI on the inpatient treatment plan.
Among the 430 scans reviewed, most (57.7%) were of the abdomen/pelvis. RAI was recommended in 67 cases (odds ratio [OR] 15.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 12.4-19.3) and AI was completed in 24 of 67 cases (35.8%). Factors associated with a recommendation for AI were the presence of an incidental finding (OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.7-6.8) and verbal communication of the result to the ordering provider (OR 2.09, 95% CI 1.23-3.5). When performed, AI altered the treatment plan 75% (18/24) of the time. Among the 43 cases in which AI was not performed, 34.1% were deferred to outpatient, 13.6% underwent alternative clinical intervention, and 13.6% were judged unnecessary by the primary team. No rationale was documented in the chart for the remaining 38.6%.
Despite concerns about autoreferral by radiologists for AI studies, we found a lower rate than in many prior studies, which may reflect a change in clinical practice. One-third of these recommendations were implemented and verbal communication was strongly associated with the likelihood of second image ordering. In the majority of the cases, the AI affected patient management. Based on these findings, radiologists should consider calling the ordering provider to increase the likelihood that the primary team will follow their recommendations.
研究发现,在初次计算机断层扫描(CT)中,高达31%的扫描会伴有额外影像学检查建议(RAI)。在本研究中,我们评估了转诊医生接受这些建议的频率以及人工智能对病例管理的影响。
我们对一家三级医疗中心在1个月内对成年住院患者进行的所有胸部、腹部和骨盆初次CT扫描进行了横断面研究。检查每份放射学报告中是否提及RAI。我们使用标准化的摘要工具查阅病历,以了解RAI的指征(与原诊断或偶然发现相关)、临床医生采纳或放弃RAI的理由以及人工智能对住院治疗计划的影响。
在审查的430次扫描中,大多数(57.7%)是腹部/骨盆扫描。67例(优势比[OR]15.6%;95%置信区间[CI]12.4 - 19.3)被建议进行RAI,其中24例(35.8%)完成了人工智能检查。与人工智能检查建议相关的因素包括存在偶然发现(OR 3.5,95% CI 1.7 - 6.8)以及将结果口头告知开单医生(OR 2.09,95% CI 1.23 - 3.5)。当进行人工智能检查时,75%(18/24)的情况下会改变治疗计划。在未进行人工智能检查的43例中,34.1%被推迟到门诊,13.6%接受了替代临床干预,13.6%被主诊团队判定为不必要。其余38.6%在病历中未记录理由。
尽管担心放射科医生自动转诊进行人工智能检查,但我们发现这一比例低于许多先前的研究,这可能反映了临床实践的变化。这些建议中有三分之一得到了实施,并且口头沟通与再次进行影像学检查的可能性密切相关。在大多数情况下,人工智能影响了患者管理。基于这些发现,放射科医生应考虑致电开单医生,以增加主诊团队遵循其建议的可能性。