Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32493463›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2020

Does health information technology improve acknowledgement of radiology results for discharged Emergency Department patients? A before and after study.

Julie Li, Richard Paoloni, Ling Li, Joanne Callen, Johanna I Westbrook, William B Runciman, Andrew Georgiou

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Julie LiCentre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Level 6, 75 Talavera Rd, Sydney, NSW, 2109, Australia. julie.li@mq.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-8881-5962
Richard PaoloniEmergency Department, Concord Repatriation General Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
Ling LiCentre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Level 6, 75 Talavera Rd, Sydney, NSW, 2109, Australia.
Joanne CallenCentre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Level 6, 75 Talavera Rd, Sydney, NSW, 2109, Australia.
Johanna I WestbrookCentre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Level 6, 75 Talavera Rd, Sydney, NSW, 2109, Australia.
William B RuncimanAustralian Centre for Precision Health, Cancer Research Institute, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.
Andrew GeorgiouCentre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Level 6, 75 Talavera Rd, Sydney, NSW, 2109, Australia.
Macquarie University · AUThe University of Sydney · AUUniversity of South Australia · AU

Funding

Australian Research Council (AU) DP120100297National Health and Medical Research Council APP1111925
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe inadequate follow-up of test results is a key patient safety concern, carrying severe consequences for care outcomes. Patients discharged from the emergency department are at particular risk of having test results pending at discharge due to their short lengths of stay, with many hospitals acknowledging that they do not have reliable systems for managing such results. Health information technology hold the potential to reducing errors in the test result management process. This study aimed to measure changes in the proportion of acknowledged radiology reports pre and post introduction of an electronic result acknowledgement system and to determine the proportion of reports with abnormal results, including clinically significant abnormal results requiring follow-up action.

methodsA before and after study was conducted in the emergency department of a 450-bed metropolitan teaching hospital in Australia. All radiology reports for discharged patients for a one-month period before and after implementation of the electronic result acknowledgement system were reviewed to determine; i) those that reported abnormal results; ii) evidence of test result acknowledgement. All unacknowledged radiology results with an abnormal finding were assessed by an independent panel of two senior emergency physicians for clinical significance.

resultsOf 1654 radiology reports in the pre-implementation period 70.6% (n = 1167) had documented evidence of acknowledgement by a clinician. For reports with abnormal results, 71.6% (n = 396) were acknowledged. Of 157 unacknowledged abnormal radiology reports reviewed by an independent emergency physician panel, 34.4% (n = 54) were identified as clinically significant and 50% of these (n = 27) were deemed to carry a moderate likelihood of patient morbidity if not followed up. Electronic acknowledgement occurred for all radiology reports in the post period (n = 1423), representing a 30.4% (95% CI: 28.1-32.6%) increase in acknowledgement rate, and an increase of 28.4% (95% CI: 24.6-32.2%) for abnormal radiology results.

conclusionsThe findings of this study demonstrate the potential of health information technology to improve the safety and effectiveness of the diagnostic process by increasing the rate of follow up of results pending at hospital discharge.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsMedical InformaticsPatient DischargeAustraliaEmergency Service, HospitalHumansMedical ErrorsRadiologyDuty to recontactEvaluation studiesMedical errorsMedical informaticsRadiology

Identifiers

PMID32493463
PMCPMC7268495
OpenAlexW3031951311

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.