Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25341129›Full record

ArticleAJR. American journal of roentgenology2014

Four-year impact of an alert notification system on closed-loop communication of critical test results.

Ronilda Lacson, Luciano M Prevedello, Katherine P Andriole, Stacy D O'Connor, Christopher Roy, Tejal Gandhi, Anuj K Dalal, Luke Sato, Ramin Khorasani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AJR. American journal of roentgenology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Incidental Pulmonary Nodules: What Should We Do in 2026?Respiration; international review of thoracic diseases · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Incidental Pulmonary Nodules - What Do We Know in 2022.Respiration; international review of thoracic diseases · 2022
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Ronilda Lacson1 Center for Evidence-Based Imaging, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 1620 Tremont St, 3rd Fl, Boston, MA 02120.
Luciano M Prevedello
Katherine P Andriole
Stacy D O'Connor
Christopher Roy
Tejal Gandhi
Anuj K Dalal
Luke Sato
Ramin Khorasani

Funding

RESEARCH TRAINING-MEDICAL INFORMATICS 90T15LM007092 · NLM · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (SCH OF PUBLIC HLTH) · PI Nils Gehlenborg · 1992 to 2026
$32.8M
Deployment of Enhanced Critical Imaging Result Notification (DECIRN)R18HS019635 · AHRQ · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI LACSON, RONILDA · 2010 to 2011
$297k
AHRQ HHS R18 HS019635AHRQ HHS R18HS019635NLM NIH HHS T15 LM007092NLM NIH HHS T15LM007092
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveOne of the patient safety goals proposed by the Joint Commission urges hospitals to develop a policy for communicating critical test results and to measure adherence to that policy. We evaluated the impact of an alert notification system on policy adherence for communicating critical imaging test results to referring providers and assessed system adoption over the first 4 years after implementation. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis study was performed in a 753-bed academic medical center. The intervention, an automated alert notification system for critical results, was implemented in January 2010. The primary outcome was adherence to institutional policy for timely closed-loop communication of critical imaging results, and the secondary outcome was system adoption. Policy adherence was determined through manual review of a random sample of radiology reports from the first 4 years after the intervention (n = 37,604) compared with baseline outcomes 1 year before the intervention (n = 9430). Adoption was evaluated by quantifying the use of the system overall and the proportion of alerts that used noninterruptive communication as a percentage of all reports generated by 320 radiologists (n = 1,538,059). A statistical analysis of the trend at 6-month intervals over 4 years was performed using a chi-square trend test.

resultsAdherence to the policy increased from 91.3% before the intervention to 95.0% after the intervention (p < 0.0001). There was a ninefold increase in the critical results communicated via the system (chi-square trend test, p < 0.0001). During the first 4 years after the intervention, 41,445 alerts (41% of the total number of alerts) used the system's noninterruptive process for communicating less urgent critical results, which was substantially unchanged over the 4 years postintervention, thus reducing unnecessary paging interruptions.

conclusionAn automated alert notification system for communicating critical imaging results was successfully adopted and was associated with increased adherence to institutional policy for communicating critical test results and with reduced workflow interruptions.

Indexed as

BostonDecision Support Systems, ClinicalDiagnostic ImagingGuideline AdherenceGuidelines as TopicHospital Communication SystemsLongitudinal StudiesRadiologyReferral and ConsultationUtilization ReviewWorkflowWorkloadalert notificationautomated systemclosed-loop communicationcritical test results

Identifiers

PMID25341129
PMCPMC4426858

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.