Citas bibligráficas
Guzman, J., (2023). Preferencia, características y componentes de un informe radiológico de calidad en un hospital público de Lima - Perú [Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia]. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12866/13441
Guzman, J., Preferencia, características y componentes de un informe radiológico de calidad en un hospital público de Lima - Perú []. PE: Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia; 2023. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12866/13441
@misc{renati/910690,
title = "Preferencia, características y componentes de un informe radiológico de calidad en un hospital público de Lima - Perú",
author = "Guzman Quispe, Jelly Annie",
publisher = "Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia",
year = "2023"
}
Background: The radiological report is a medical-legal document that forms an essential part of the diagnosis and directs the patient's medical care, it is also the main source of communication between the radiologist and the physician. Despite its importance, it is the least standardized and valued document in medical practice. Objectives: To evaluate the preference between a standardized structured radiological report and a radiological report in free text and to know the characteristics and essential components of a quality radiological report for the physicians of the Cayetano Heredia Hospital. Materials and Methods: Cross-sectional descriptive observational study. A survey was applied to 212 physicians. The data obtained were collected in Microsoft Excel and analyzed with STATA 17.0 statistical software. Results: 81% of the physicians preferred the standardized structured radiological report. The characteristics for which they chose such a report were: organized (100%), understandable (89.5%), more descriptive (86%), focused on the clinical scenario (82.5%), easy to read (81.9%) and less prone to errors (73.8%). The essential components of a quality radiology report an opinion of the respondents were: clinical information (77.8%), procedures and materials (78.3%), comparison with previous studies (85.4%), normal or negative findings (92.0%), incidental findings (98.6%), answers clinical question (93.9%), differential diagnoses (93.9%), and recommendations for further imaging studies (91.5%). Conclusions: Physicians preferred the standardized structured report so it is suggested to implement structured templates as they allow a better, fast and efficient ommunication.
Este ítem está sujeto a una licencia Creative Commons Licencia Creative Commons