Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology最新文献

Purpose

We developed a novel patient-radiologist consultation for patients scheduled for lung cancer screening (LCS). We hypothesized that this intervention would improve patient attitudes towards LCS adherence and smoking cessation.

Methods

This quality improvement project enrolled 38 LCS patients (a majority were African American) and included 20 current and 18 former smokers. The intervention, a 5–10 min consultation with a radiologist who provided preliminary interpretation of pertinent imaging findings in conjunction with smoking cessation counseling, took place in the radiology reading room immediately after the low dose computed tomography (LDCT) patient scan. Pre- and post-intervention surveys assessed patient attitudes towards LCS and smoking cessation.

Results

All recruited patients consented to participate in this project. Regarding viewing their LCS imaging, 86.8% (33/38) expressed general interest initially, with 100.0% (38/38) being more interested afterwards. On LCS logistics, 71.1% (27/38) reported prior knowledge at baseline, while 89.5% (34/38) reported being more informed following the intervention. Among current smokers, 90.0% (18/20) were already motivated towards quitting smoking at baseline, with 100.0% (20/20) exiting the intervention being more interested in doing so. Regarding smoking cessation resources, 95.0% (19/20) were interested in accessing such resources at baseline, and 90.0% (18/20, 2 were same/neutral) were more interested afterwards.

Conclusions

Patients’ attitudes towards LCS and self-reported interest in quitting smoking were directionally higher after the consultation than at baseline. Incorporating LCS consultations with radiologists as part of patient-centered care provides a resource to educate patients on their own LCS imaging findings while promoting LCS adherence and smoking cessation.

Purpose

To evaluate demographics, academic backgrounds, and scholarly activities of Program Directors (PDs) in Abdominal Imaging Fellowships in the United States (US), emphasizing gender representation, international origins, and academic milestones.

Methods

A list of Fellowships in Abdominal Imaging programs in the US was obtained from the Society of Abdominal Radiology. The search was expanded using the Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database. Data for PDs were sourced from program websites, Healthgrades, Doximity, and Elsevier's Scopus. Metrics such as age, gender, education, academic rank, additional qualifications, prior leadership roles, publications, and h-indices were analyzed using R software. A two-tailed unpaired t-test was used to calculate the difference in means of scholarly activity between male and female PDs.

Results

113 programs were identified: South (36.28%), Northeast (25.66%), Mid-West (20.35%), West (17.69%). Of 107 PDs, 54% male, 41% female, and average age 48 ± 9.4 years. 66.6% were US graduates, 29.2% were international graduates. Most were Assistant Professors (36.28%). 19.46% had degrees like M.P.H. or M.B.A. 45% had prior leadership roles. Average year of residency graduation was 2007. Mean publication count was 54.16, and mean h-index was 14.663. Male PDs had higher publication counts and h-indices than female PDs (p= 0.009 and p= 0.0019 respectively).

Conclusion

In Abdominal Imaging Fellowship programs in the US, there is an increasing representation of females in Program Director roles. However, research led by female PDs remains less prevalent. The field of Abdominal Imaging values contributions from international graduates and insights from Assistant Professors.

CT is often the first imaging test in female patients with lower abdominal and pelvic pain because of the wide availability of CT and differential diagnoses that span both gynecologic and gastrointestinal disease. Pathology within the female pelvis may be difficult to diagnose on CT owing to suboptimal delineation of anatomy in comparison to MRI and ultrasound. These challenges are confounded by overlapping imaging features of a wide range of gynecologic entities and can lead to diagnostic dilemmas. High value CT interpretation will direct the clinician to the best next diagnostic step as ultrasound and MRI provide superior soft tissue delineation. Other imaging modalities, laboratory investigations, or tissue sampling may be necessary to definitively characterize indeterminate lesions. In this review, we illustrate various cases of mistaken identity on CT of the female pelvis involving the ovaries, uterus, and peritoneal cavity while highlighting clinical pearls that may aid the radiologist in arriving at the correct diagnosis and avoiding potential pitfalls.

None

Purpose

To determine the reliability of the cardiothoracic ratio (CTR) as a simple method to assess the cardiac size and function in patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM).

Methods

In a sample of 91 patients (66 patients with diagnosed non-ischemic cardiomyopathy and 25 controls) we calculated the CTR on a posteroanterior chest radiograph and ventricular and atrial size based on accepted cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging values. Left and right ventricular ejection fraction was also calculated. The CTR and cardiac chamber size were compared between patients with NICM and healthy individuals. The distinction between normal and increased cardiac chamber size was made using published normal CMR reference values stratified by age and gender.

Results

CTR values were higher in the NICM group (50.7±5.5 % Vs. 45.3±4.7 %, p<0.001). Likewise, LVEDVi, LV indexed mass, LA indexed volume, LA indexed area, and RA indexed area were higher, and LVEF and RVEF were lower in patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (p < 0.05). In patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, the greatest correlation between CTR and CMR values was with LVEDVi (ρ=0.4, p < 0.001), LA indexed volume (ρ=0.5, p < 0.001), LA indexed area (ρ=0.5, p < 0.001) and RA indexed area (ρ=0.4, p < 0.001). However, the correlation strength was only moderate.

Conclusion

Despite patients with NICM had higher CTR values than the control group, a substantial proportion of these patients showed normal CTRs (<50 %). This fact limits the usefulness of CTR to reliably predict NICM. Correlation between CTR and heart chamber dilation on CMR was only weak to moderate.

The supplemental ERAS application that includes three components: past experiences, geographic preferences, and program signals was introduced in 2022 to complement the standard ERAS CV material. The goal was to help programs identify optimal candidates to interview and to improve the chances of applicants being invited for interviews at programs that align with their goals and interests. Based on limited data, Program signal is the most emphasized component by the programs. Applicants should realize that programs have used signals to determine who to interview (aligned with AAMC guidance), and to determine the program's candidate rank list (contrary to AAMC guidance). We have herein suggested options for leveraging benefits from the ERAS supplemental application which has now been incorporated into the full ERAS application.

Purpose

This study aims to characterize the experiences of integrated IR/DR applicants and program directors (PDs) participating in the first completely virtual application process during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Survey questionnaires were distributed to IR/DR applicants and PDs for the 2020-2021 application cycle. Applicants were asked questions regarding social media presence, number of interviews received, preference of the in-person interview process, and descriptive experiences of the process. PDs were surveyed regarding social media presence, applications received, and interview and match results during the virtual 2020-2021 cycle and the in-person 2019-2020 cycle.

Results

56 (25.3 %) applicants responded to the survey. 44 (78.6 %) students relied on social media to learn about programs. 33 students (58.9 %) applied to more programs than they had planned. Students applied to an average of 47.5 integrated IR/DR programs and 48.8 DR programs and received an average of 18.8 and 17.8 IR and DR interviews, respectively. 98.2 % of students reported “convenience” and “ease and flexibility of interview scheduling” as advantages of virtual interviews. Sixteen PDs (17.3 %) completed the survey. 15 PDs (93.8 %) created a program-specific promotional video. Compared to 172 applications received in the 2019-2020 season, residency programs received 151 this past cycle (p = .24). A similar number of applicants were interviewed and ranked in both cycles.

Conclusion

Medical students created social media accounts and applied to more programs, and overall preferred virtual interviews. There was no significant change in the number of interview invites or the number of ranks submitted by PDs.

Objective

To evaluate differences in quantitative features between poorly versus highly rated patient ratings of radiology reports.

Methods

A HIPAA-compliant, IRB-waived study was performed from October 2019 to June 2021. Patients completed an optional 2-question survey (“How helpful was the report?” with a 5-star scale and an open text box) embedded into the patient portal, and reports were assessed for readability and brevity. Quantitative analyses were performed between poorly (≤3 stars) and highly rated (>3 stars) CT and MRI reports, including the use of structured reporting, number of words, words per sentence, Flesch Reading Ease, and Flesh-Kincaid Grade level within the findings and impression sections of the radiology reports. A two-tailed nonparametric Mann U Whitney test was performed for continuous variables and Chi² for categorical variables.

Results

Of the 490 responses, all 135 evaluating CT or MR were included (27%). 106/135 (78%) of the patients gave high ratings (score of 4 or 5). 46/135 (34%), the radiology reports were in a structured format. The proportion of highly rated reports were significantly higher for structured than freeform reports (93.5 vs. 70.8%, p = 0.002). In the findings section, highly rated reports had a lower Flesch Reading Ease score than poorly rated reports (19.6 vs. 28.9, p <0.01). No significant differences were observed between number of words (p=0.27), words per sentence (p=0.94), and Flesh-Kincaid Grade level (p=0.09) in the findings section. In the impression section, no differences were observed between highly vs. poorly rated reports among the measured parameters.

Conclusion

Patients preferred highly rated reports that were structured and had lower Flesch Reading Ease scores in the findings section.