JDI: Interventional rad QA can minimize data entry
The integration of an interventional radiology (IR) quality assurance (QA) reporting system into the workflow process and making completion mandatory has the potential to minimize the work required for data entry and to improve participation in the QA process compared to data entry requirements for stand-alone software programs, according to research in the August edition of the Journal of Digital Imaging.
“Further experience is necessary to identify the limitations of the system, and implement modifications to improve the usefulness of the QA program,” continued lead author Sanjay Gupta, MD, from the department of diagnostic radiology at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, and colleagues.
According to the authors, the lack of user-friendly systems for reporting complications is a major barrier to improving QA programs in IR services.
The authors implemented an IR QA process as a module within the EMR and radiologist dictation system applications used at MD Anderson. “After a radiologist completes a dictation, he or she must select from a drop-down list of complications entries before proceeding to the next case,” the authors clarified. “Delayed QA events can be entered using the same applications. All complication entries are sent to a database, which is queried to run reports.”
Between Nov. 1, 2005, and May 8, 2008, all 20,034 interventional procedures were entered into the QA database, 1,144 complications were reported, 9.6 percent of which were classified as major, the researchers found. “[T]he remaining complications (1,034; 90.4 percent) were classified as minor.”
Although 996 complications were entered at the time of dictation, 12.9 percent 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,” the authors stated. “We studied post-lung-biopsy pneumothorax and chest tube rates and initiated a quality improvement process based on the results.
“Before instituting the current IR QA program, we had to ask individual faculty members to voluntarily contribute such cases for analysis. With the current system, however, a quick query of the IR QA program can identify all complications during any given time period and thereby allow the peer review committee to select appropriate cases to be discussed,” the authors concluded.
“Further experience is necessary to identify the limitations of the system, and implement modifications to improve the usefulness of the QA program,” continued lead author Sanjay Gupta, MD, from the department of diagnostic radiology at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, and colleagues.
According to the authors, the lack of user-friendly systems for reporting complications is a major barrier to improving QA programs in IR services.
The authors implemented an IR QA process as a module within the EMR and radiologist dictation system applications used at MD Anderson. “After a radiologist completes a dictation, he or she must select from a drop-down list of complications entries before proceeding to the next case,” the authors clarified. “Delayed QA events can be entered using the same applications. All complication entries are sent to a database, which is queried to run reports.”
Between Nov. 1, 2005, and May 8, 2008, all 20,034 interventional procedures were entered into the QA database, 1,144 complications were reported, 9.6 percent of which were classified as major, the researchers found. “[T]he remaining complications (1,034; 90.4 percent) were classified as minor.”
Although 996 complications were entered at the time of dictation, 12.9 percent 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,” the authors stated. “We studied post-lung-biopsy pneumothorax and chest tube rates and initiated a quality improvement process based on the results.
“Before instituting the current IR QA program, we had to ask individual faculty members to voluntarily contribute such cases for analysis. With the current system, however, a quick query of the IR QA program can identify all complications during any given time period and thereby allow the peer review committee to select appropriate cases to be discussed,” the authors concluded.