Journal List > J Korean Soc Radiol > v.65(3) > 1087006

TOOLS
Moon, Park, Kim, Park, Kim, Park, Park, and Jeon: Survey of the Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction of Referring Physicians Concerning the Radiologic Report of Plain Radiography Except for Chest Plain Radiography
Other
Original Article

Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology 2011; 65(3): 297-302.

Published online: 30 September 2011

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3348/jksr.2011.65.3.297

Survey of the Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction of Referring Physicians Concerning the Radiologic Report of Plain Radiography Except for Chest Plain Radiography

Soon-Young Moon, MD1, Hee-Jin Park, MD2, 3, Sam Soo Kim, MD3, Noh-Hyuck Park, MD1, Mi-Sung Kim, MD1, Chan-Sub Park, MD1, Ji-Yeon Park, MD1, Hyun-Jun Jeon, MD4

1Department of Radiology, Myongji Hospital, Kwandong University College of Medicine, Goyang, Korea.

2Department of Radiology, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

3Department of Radiology, School of Medicine Kangwon National University, Chuncheon, Korea.

4Department of Occupational Medicine, Dongsan Medical Center, Keimyung University School of Medicine, Daegu, Korea.

Corresponding author: Hee-Jin Park, MD. Department of Radiology, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 78 Saemunan-gil, Jongno-gu, Seoul 110-746, Korea. Tel. 82-2-2001-1035, Fax. 82-2-2001-1030, parkhiji@gmail.com

Received 4 April 2011       Accepted 2 June 2011

Copyright © 2011 The Korean Society of Radiology

Abstract

Purpose

To assess the satisfaction, attitude, dissatisfaction and general opinion of radiologic reports on the plain radiography, except for chest plain radiographies.

Materials and Methods

A questionnaire was distributed to the 63 physicians of our hospital. The questionnaire aimed to investigate physician's general attitude, dissatisfaction and opinions. The responses elicited, as well as discrepancies among residents, staff, medical clinicians and surgical clinicians were assessed. Chi-square and t-tests were used to determine the value of the data.

Results

The mean rate of satisfaction for the reading report by medical clinicians (64%) was higher than surgical clinicians (25%) (p < 0.001). The mean satisfaction score was 3.1 (2.8-3.61). The main cause for dissatisfaction was the absence of reports when they were needed, especially for residents.

Conclusion

The medical clinician's dependence on radiologic reports was higher than that of the surgical clinicians. The satisfaction score was in the middle range and the main cause of dissatisfaction was absence of the reports when they were needed.

Keywords: Radiology Reporting System, Radiography, Consumer Satisfaction

Figures and Tables

Fig. 1

The time of report reading by the clinicians.

jksr-65-297-g001
Fig. 2

The frequency of effect of the report for the further evaluation.

jksr-65-297-g002
Fig. 3

The satisfaction score on the report.

jksr-65-297-g003
Fig. 4

The cause of dissatisfaction.

jksr-65-297-g004
Fig. 5

The need of the report on plain radiography.

jksr-65-297-g005
Fig. 6

The reason of the need of the report on plain radiography.

jksr-65-297-g006
Table 1

Rate of the Reading Report by the Clinician (n = 63)

jksr-65-297-i001

Note.-p-value (medicine vs. surgery) < 0.001, p-value (professor vs. resident) = 0.185,

PM1 = professor of medicine, PS3 = professor of surgery, RM2 = resident of medicine, RS4 = resident of surgery

Table 2

Assistive Rate of the Report to the Clinician (n = 63)

jksr-65-297-i002

Note.-p-value (medicine vs. surgery) = 0.378, p-value (professor vs. resident) = 0.186.

PM1 = professor of medicine, PS3 = professor of surgery, RM2 = resident of medicine, RS4 = resident of surgery

References

1. Kim EJ, Kwack KS, Cho JH, Jang EH. Analysis of the radiology reports from radiology clinics. J Korean Soc Radiol. 2009; 61:263–268.
2. Kim WY, Hwang SS, Ahn MI, Jung YJ, Jung JI, Jang HS, et al. Radiologic reports: attitude, preferred type, and opinion of referring physicians. J Korean Radiol Soc. 2001; 45:325–331.
3. Choi YH, Jae HJ, Shin CI, Song SJ, Cha WC, Na DG. New around-the-clock radiology coverage system for the emergency department: a satisfaction survey among clinicians. J Korean Radiol Soc. 2008; 58:543–548.
4. Naik SS, Hanbidge A, Wilson SR. Radiology reports: examining radiologist and clinician preferences regarding style and content. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001; 176:591–598.
5. Berlin L. Malpractice issue in radiology: pitfalls of the vague radiology report. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000; 174:1511–1518.
TOOLS
Similar articles