Impact of Structured Reporting on Clinician Satisfaction in Radiology: Experience from a Teaching Hospitalin a tribal district of Central India
Fuente:
Zenodo
Salvato in:
| Autore principale: | |
|---|---|
| Natura: | Recurso digital |
| Pubblicazione: |
Zenodo
2025
|
| Accesso online: | |
| Tags: |
Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
|
| _version_ | 1866902249144320000 |
|---|---|
| author | Dr. Prashant Bagdey |
| author_facet | Dr. Prashant Bagdey |
| contents | <table style="border-collapse: collapse;"> <tbody> <tr style="height: 385.7pt;"> <td style="width: 71.38%; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; height: 385.7pt;"> <p><strong><span lang="EN-IN">Background</span></strong><strong><span lang="EN-GB">:</span></strong><span>Radiology reports are the primary communication tool between radiologists and clinicians. Traditional narrative reports often lack uniformity, clarity, and completeness, leading to variability in interpretation. Structured reporting, using standardized templates and terminology, has been proposed as a solution to improve communication and clinical utility. International studies have shown increased clinician satisfaction with structured reports, but data from Indian teaching hospitals remain limited.</span></p> <p><strong><span>Aims: </span></strong><span>To evaluate the impact of structured reporting on clinician satisfaction compared to conventional narrative reporting in a teaching hospital setting.</span></p> <p><strong><span>Methods</span></strong><strong><span lang="EN-GB">:</span></strong><span>This prospective cross-sectional study was conducted in the Department of Radiology, Government Medical College, Gondia, from July 2024 to March 2025. A total of 42 faculty members from clinical branches including medicine, surgery, pediatrics, obstetrics and gynecology, orthopedics, and allied specialties were enrolled. Structured templates for common radiological examinations (chest radiograph, CT, ultrasound) were prepared and compared with conventional narrative reports of the same cases. Participants rated clarity, completeness, readability, decision-making support, and overall satisfaction using a five-point Likert scale. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, chi-square test, and paired t-test, with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant.</span></p> <p><strong><span>Results</span></strong><strong><span lang="EN-GB">:</span></strong><span>Structured reports were rated significantly higher across all evaluated domains. Overall satisfaction was achieved in 83.3% of participants with structured reports compared to 47.6% with narrative reports (mean score 4.3 ± 0.6 vs. 3.2 ± 0.8, p < 0.001). Clarity was rated positively by 88.1% of clinicians for structured reports versus 54.8% for narrative reports. Completeness was noted by 78.6% for structured and 40.5% for narrative reports. Structured reports were also considered more useful for quick decision-making (81.0% vs. 45.2%) and multidisciplinary case discussions (83.3% vs. 42.9%).</span></p> <p><strong><span>Conclusion</span></strong><strong><span lang="EN-GB">: </span></strong><span>Structured reporting significantly improved clinician satisfaction compared to conventional narrative reporting, with clear advantages in clarity, completeness, and clinical utility. Wider adoption of structured reporting in teaching hospitals is recommended to enhance communication between radiologists and clinicians, strengthen interdisciplinary collaboration, and improve patient care.</span></p> <p><span> </span></p> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> |
| format | Recurso digital |
| id | zenodo_https___doi_org_10_5281_zenodo_17140059 |
| institution | Zenodo |
| language | |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| publisher | Zenodo |
| record_format | zenodo |
| spellingShingle | Impact of Structured Reporting on Clinician Satisfaction in Radiology: Experience from a Teaching Hospitalin a tribal district of Central India Dr. Prashant Bagdey <table style="border-collapse: collapse;"> <tbody> <tr style="height: 385.7pt;"> <td style="width: 71.38%; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; height: 385.7pt;"> <p><strong><span lang="EN-IN">Background</span></strong><strong><span lang="EN-GB">:</span></strong><span>Radiology reports are the primary communication tool between radiologists and clinicians. Traditional narrative reports often lack uniformity, clarity, and completeness, leading to variability in interpretation. Structured reporting, using standardized templates and terminology, has been proposed as a solution to improve communication and clinical utility. International studies have shown increased clinician satisfaction with structured reports, but data from Indian teaching hospitals remain limited.</span></p> <p><strong><span>Aims: </span></strong><span>To evaluate the impact of structured reporting on clinician satisfaction compared to conventional narrative reporting in a teaching hospital setting.</span></p> <p><strong><span>Methods</span></strong><strong><span lang="EN-GB">:</span></strong><span>This prospective cross-sectional study was conducted in the Department of Radiology, Government Medical College, Gondia, from July 2024 to March 2025. A total of 42 faculty members from clinical branches including medicine, surgery, pediatrics, obstetrics and gynecology, orthopedics, and allied specialties were enrolled. Structured templates for common radiological examinations (chest radiograph, CT, ultrasound) were prepared and compared with conventional narrative reports of the same cases. Participants rated clarity, completeness, readability, decision-making support, and overall satisfaction using a five-point Likert scale. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, chi-square test, and paired t-test, with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant.</span></p> <p><strong><span>Results</span></strong><strong><span lang="EN-GB">:</span></strong><span>Structured reports were rated significantly higher across all evaluated domains. Overall satisfaction was achieved in 83.3% of participants with structured reports compared to 47.6% with narrative reports (mean score 4.3 ± 0.6 vs. 3.2 ± 0.8, p < 0.001). Clarity was rated positively by 88.1% of clinicians for structured reports versus 54.8% for narrative reports. Completeness was noted by 78.6% for structured and 40.5% for narrative reports. Structured reports were also considered more useful for quick decision-making (81.0% vs. 45.2%) and multidisciplinary case discussions (83.3% vs. 42.9%).</span></p> <p><strong><span>Conclusion</span></strong><strong><span lang="EN-GB">: </span></strong><span>Structured reporting significantly improved clinician satisfaction compared to conventional narrative reporting, with clear advantages in clarity, completeness, and clinical utility. Wider adoption of structured reporting in teaching hospitals is recommended to enhance communication between radiologists and clinicians, strengthen interdisciplinary collaboration, and improve patient care.</span></p> <p><span> </span></p> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> |
| title | Impact of Structured Reporting on Clinician Satisfaction in Radiology: Experience from a Teaching Hospitalin a tribal district of Central India |
| url | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17140059 |