Advertisement

Journal of Digital Imaging

, Volume 24, Issue 4, pp 672–679 | Cite as

Early Experience Using an Online Reporting System for Interventional Radiology Procedure-Related Complications Integrated with a Digital Dictation System

  • Sanjay GuptaEmail author
  • Jay Patel
  • Kevin McEnery
  • Michael J. Wallace
  • Kamran Ahrar
  • Chuck Suitor
  • Marshall E. Hicks
Article

Abstract

The absence of user-friendly systems for reporting complications is a major barrier to improving quality assurance (QA) programs in interventional radiology (IR) services. We describe the implementation of a QA application that is completely integrated with the radiology dictation system. We implemented an IR QA process as a module within the electronic medical record and radiologist dictation system applications used at our institution. After a radiologist completes a dictation, he or she must select from a drop-down list of complications before proceeding to the next case. Delayed QA events can be entered using the same applications. All complication entries are sent to a database, which is queried to run reports. During the study period, all the 20,034 interventional procedures were entered in the QA database, 1,144 complications were reported, 110 (9.6%) of which were classified as major. Although majority of the complications (996) were entered at the time of dictation, 148 complications (12.9%) were entered afterwards. All major complications were referred to the IR peer review committee, and 30 of these were discussed in the morbidity and mortality meetings. We studied post-lung-biopsy pneumothorax and chest tube rates and initiated a quality improvement process based on the results.The integration of the IR QA reporting system into the workflow process and the mandatory requirements for completion has the potential to minimize the work effort required to enter complication data, and improve participation in the QA process.

Key words

Interventional radiology quality assurance complications data collection workflow 

References

  1. 1.
    Barraclough BH, Birch J: Health care safety and quality: where have we been and where are we going? Med J Aust 184:S48–50, 2006PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Becher EC, Chassin MR: Improving the quality of health care: who will lead? Health Aff (Millwood) 20:164–179, 2001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Donnelly LF, Strife JL: Performance-based assessment of radiology faculty: a practical plan to promote improvement and meet JCAHO standards. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:1398–1401, 2005PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thrall JH: Quality and safety revolution in health care. Radiology 233:3–6, 2004PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Walsh K, Antony J: Improving patient safety and quality: what are the challenges and gaps in introducing an integrated electronic adverse incident and recording system within health care industry? Int J Health Care Qual Assur 20:107–115, 2007PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Deitch CH, Chan WC, Sunshine JH, Zinninger MD, Cascade PN, Cochran ST: Quality assessment and improvement: what radiologists do and think. AJR Am J Roentgenol 163:1245–1254, 1994PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Frank MS, Mann FA, Gillespy T: Quality assurance: a system that integrates a digital dictation system with a computer data base. AJR Am J Roentgenol 161:1101–1103, 1993PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Johnson CD, Krecke KN, Roberts RM, Denham C: Quality initiatives: developing a radiology quality and safety program: a primer. Radiographics 29:951–959, 2009PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kruskal JB, Yam CS, Sosna J, Hallett DT, Milliman YJ, Kressel HY: Implementation of online radiology quality assurance reporting system for performance improvement: initial evaluation. Radiology 241:518–527, 2006PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mahgerefteh S, Kruskal JB, Yam CS, Blachar A, Sosna J: Peer review in diagnostic radiology: current state and a vision for the future. Radiographics 29:1221–1231, 2009PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kruskal JB, Anderson S, Yam CS, Sosna J: Strategies for establishing a comprehensive quality and performance improvement program in a radiology department. Radiographics 29:315–329, 2009PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kruskal JB, Siewert B, Anderson SW, Eisenberg RL, Sosna J: Managing an acute adverse event in a radiology department. Radiographics 28:1237–1250, 2008PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Guidelines for establishing a quality assurance program in vascular and interventional radiology. J Vasc Interv Radiol 14:S203-207, 2003Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    FitzGerald R: Radiological error: analysis, standard setting, targeted instruction and teamworking. Eur Radiol 15:1760–1767, 2005PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Renfrew DL, Franken Jr, EA, Berbaum KS, Weigelt FH, Abu-Yousef MM: Error in radiology: classification and lessons in 182 cases presented at a problem case conference. Radiology 183:145–150, 1992PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Soffa DJ, Lewis RS, Sunshine JH, Bhargavan M: Disagreement in interpretation: a method for the development of benchmarks for quality assurance in imaging. J Am Coll Radiol 1:212–217, 2004PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hahn PF, Lee MJ, Gazelle GS, Forman BH, Mueller PR: A simplified HyperCard data base for patient management in an interventional practice: experience with more than 4000 cases. AJR Am J Roentgenol 162:1443–1446, 1994PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mayo-Smith WW, Jayaraman MV, Han RS, Dupuy DE, Movson JS: Multiinstitutional computer database for recording nonvascular imaging-guided interventions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:1491–1493, 2003PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    McEnery KW, Suitor CT, Hildebrand S, Downs R. RadStation: client-based digital dictation system and integrated clinical information display with an embedded Web-browser. Proc AMIA Symp :561-564, 2000Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    McEnery KW, Suitor CT, Hildebrand S, Downs RL: Integration of radiologist peer review into clinical review workstation. J Digit Imaging 13:101–104, 2000PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    McEnery KW, Suitor CT, Hildebrand S, Downs RL: Radiologist's clinical information review workstation interfaced with digital dictation system. J Digit Imaging 13:45–48, 2000PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Imaging Informatics in Medicine 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sanjay Gupta
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  • Jay Patel
    • 2
  • Kevin McEnery
    • 1
  • Michael J. Wallace
    • 1
  • Kamran Ahrar
    • 1
  • Chuck Suitor
    • 2
  • Marshall E. Hicks
    • 1
  1. 1.From Department of Diagnostic RadiologyUniversity of Texas M D Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonTexas
  2. 2.EMR Development and SupportUniversity of Texas M D Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonTexas
  3. 3.Department of Diagnostic RadiologyThe University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonTexas

Personalised recommendations