Alioth Guerrero-Aranda, Henry Friman-Guillen, Andrés Antonio González-Garrido
{"title":"Acceptability by End-users of a Standardized Structured Format for Reporting EEG.","authors":"Alioth Guerrero-Aranda, Henry Friman-Guillen, Andrés Antonio González-Garrido","doi":"10.1177/15500594221091527","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The report of the electroencephalogram (EEG) results has traditionally been made using free-text formats with a huge variation in descriptions due to several factors. Recently, the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology (IFCN) endorsed the use of the Standardized Computer-based Organized Reporting of EEG (SCORE). This system has many advantages, but only some concerns have been investigated so far. This study aimed to assess the end-users acceptability of this proposed EEG report format. A 16-item electronic survey was sent to physicians who use EEG services of a medical diagnosis clinic. Physicians had been receiving the EEG reports in free-text formats from the same three board-certified electroencephalographers for the past three years. In January 2019, the report changed to the SCORE format. The survey assessed five main topics: physician information and historical use of EEG; personal preferences; comparative aspects of the formats; impact of the new format on clinical decision-making; and satisfaction. Thirty-two of 52 have responded to the survey (61%). On average, 81% of the responders have received enough reports with the new format to reliably complete the survey. Every responder prefers the standardized compared to the free-text format. Twenty-five responders like the inclusion of the head model, and interestingly, five suggest including another legend to differentiate \"slow activity\" from \"other abnormal activity\". Virtually all responders would recommend the new format, but one-third read only the conclusion. Our findings suggest high acceptability of this standardized report format. Despite the limitations of this study, we hope these findings contribute to the improvement and expansion of standardized EEG reporting systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":10682,"journal":{"name":"Clinical EEG and Neuroscience","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical EEG and Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15500594221091527","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
The report of the electroencephalogram (EEG) results has traditionally been made using free-text formats with a huge variation in descriptions due to several factors. Recently, the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology (IFCN) endorsed the use of the Standardized Computer-based Organized Reporting of EEG (SCORE). This system has many advantages, but only some concerns have been investigated so far. This study aimed to assess the end-users acceptability of this proposed EEG report format. A 16-item electronic survey was sent to physicians who use EEG services of a medical diagnosis clinic. Physicians had been receiving the EEG reports in free-text formats from the same three board-certified electroencephalographers for the past three years. In January 2019, the report changed to the SCORE format. The survey assessed five main topics: physician information and historical use of EEG; personal preferences; comparative aspects of the formats; impact of the new format on clinical decision-making; and satisfaction. Thirty-two of 52 have responded to the survey (61%). On average, 81% of the responders have received enough reports with the new format to reliably complete the survey. Every responder prefers the standardized compared to the free-text format. Twenty-five responders like the inclusion of the head model, and interestingly, five suggest including another legend to differentiate "slow activity" from "other abnormal activity". Virtually all responders would recommend the new format, but one-third read only the conclusion. Our findings suggest high acceptability of this standardized report format. Despite the limitations of this study, we hope these findings contribute to the improvement and expansion of standardized EEG reporting systems.
期刊介绍:
Clinical EEG and Neuroscience conveys clinically relevant research and development in electroencephalography and neuroscience. Original articles on any aspect of clinical neurophysiology or related work in allied fields are invited for publication.