ArticleJournal of digital imaging2021
Implementation of a Software Distribution Intervention to Improve Workload Balance in an Academic Pediatric Radiology Department.
Article in Journal of digital imaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Certified Imaging Informatics Professionals (CIIP) Demonstrate Value to the Healthcare Industry and Focus on Quality Through the ABII 10-Year Requirements Practice Option.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In our pediatric radiology department, radiographs (XR) are the shared responsibility of the body section and interpreted in addition to modality or site-specific assignments. Given an unequal contribution amongst radiologists to the XR workload, a software solution was developed to distribute radiographs and improve workload balance. Metrics to evaluate the intervention's effectiveness were compared before and after the intervention. Data was retrieved from the radiology analytics platform, scheduling software, and the peer learning database. Metrics were compared 12 months pre (March 2018-February 2019) and 6 months post (March 2019-August 2019) intervention on non-holiday weekdays, 7 am-5 pm. To evaluate the intervention's effectiveness, variance between radiologists' contributions to XR volume was assessed using Levene's and Fisher's tests. Changes in turnaround times (TATs) and error rates pre- and post-intervention were evaluated as secondary metrics. Following the intervention, the average number of XR interpreted on target rotations increased by 8.9% (p = 0.011) while the departmental volume of radiographs increased only 4.5%. The variance between radiologists' daily XR contribution was 21.3% (p < 0.0001) higher prior to the intervention. Days where target rotations read fewer than 5 XR decreased from 17.8 to 1.1% (p < 0.0001) after the intervention. Days in which more than 75% of all XR had a TAT less than 60 min improved from 26.8 to 39.7% (p = 0.017) after the intervention. There was no statistically significant difference in error frequency (error rate 2.49% pre and 2.72% post, p = 0.636). In conclusion, the software intervention improved XR workload contribution with decreased variability. Despite increased volumes, there was an improvement in turnaround times with no effect on error rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.