Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Sep 28;169(17):1578-86.
doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2009.263.

Timely follow-up of abnormal diagnostic imaging test results in an outpatient setting: are electronic medical records achieving their potential?

Hardeep Singh  1 , Eric J Thomas, Shrinidi Mani, Dean Sittig, Harvinder Arora, Donna Espadas, Myrna M Khan, Laura A Petersen
Affiliations

Timely follow-up of abnormal diagnostic imaging test results in an outpatient setting: are electronic medical records achieving their potential?

Hardeep Singh et al. Arch Intern Med. .

Abstract

Background: Given the fragmentation of outpatient care, timely follow-up of abnormal diagnostic imaging results remains a challenge. We hypothesized that an electronic medical record (EMR) that facilitates the transmission and availability of critical imaging results through either automated notification (alerting) or direct access to the primary report would eliminate this problem.

Methods: We studied critical imaging alert notifications in the outpatient setting of a tertiary care Department of Veterans Affairs facility from November 2007 to June 2008. Tracking software determined whether the alert was acknowledged (ie, health care practitioner/provider [HCP] opened the message for viewing) within 2 weeks of transmission; acknowledged alerts were considered read. We reviewed medical records and contacted HCPs to determine timely follow-up actions (eg, ordering a follow-up test or consultation) within 4 weeks of transmission. Multivariable logistic regression models accounting for clustering effect by HCPs analyzed predictors for 2 outcomes: lack of acknowledgment and lack of timely follow-up.

Results: Of 123 638 studies (including radiographs, computed tomographic scans, ultrasonograms, magnetic resonance images, and mammograms), 1196 images (0.97%) generated alerts; 217 (18.1%) of these were unacknowledged. Alerts had a higher risk of being unacknowledged when the ordering HCPs were trainees (odds ratio [OR], 5.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.86-10.89) and when dual-alert (>1 HCP alerted) as opposed to single-alert communication was used (OR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.22-3.36). Timely follow-up was lacking in 92 (7.7% of all alerts) and was similar for acknowledged and unacknowledged alerts (7.3% vs 9.7%; P = .22). Risk for lack of timely follow-up was higher with dual-alert communication (OR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.06-3.48) but lower when additional verbal communication was used by the radiologist (OR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.04-0.38). Nearly all abnormal results lacking timely follow-up at 4 weeks were eventually found to have measurable clinical impact in terms of further diagnostic testing or treatment.

Conclusions: Critical imaging results may not receive timely follow-up actions even when HCPs receive and read results in an advanced, integrated electronic medical record system. A multidisciplinary approach is needed to improve patient safety in this area.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
Timeline to assess study outcomes
Fig 2
Fig 2
Study Flowchart and Outcomes
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations Sentinel event statistics, March 31, 2006. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations 2005. Available at: URL: http://www.jointcommission.org/NR/rdonlyres/FA465646-5F5F-4543-AC8F-E8AF.... - PubMed
    1. Arora V, Johnson J, Lovinger D, Humphrey HJ, Meltzer DO. Communication failures in patient sign-out and suggestions for improvement: a critical incident analysis. Qual Saf Health Care. 2005 December 1;14(6):401–7. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Graber ML, Franklin N, Gordon R. Diagnostic error in internal medicine. Arch Intern Med. 2005 July 11;165(13):1493–9. - PubMed
    1. Greenberg CC, Regenbogen SE, Studdert DM, et al. Patterns of Communication Breakdowns Resulting in Injury to Surgical Patients. Journal of the American College of Surgeons. 2007 April;204(4):533–40. - PubMed
    1. Kripalani S, LeFevre F, Phillips CO, Williams MV, Basaviah P, Baker DW. Deficits in Communication and Information Transfer Between Hospital-Based and Primary Care Physicians: Implications for Patient Safety and Continuity of Care. JAMA. 2007 February 28;297(8):831–41. - PubMed

Publication types