BJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
British Journal of Radiology (1995) 68, 854-861
© 1995 British Institute of Radiology
doi:
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bryan, S.
Right arrow Articles by Buxton, M. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bryan, S.
Right arrow Articles by Buxton, M. J.

The British Journal of Radiology, Vol 68, Issue 812 854-861, Copyright © 1995 by British Institute of Radiology

ARTICLES

Explaining variation in radiologists' reporting times

S Bryan, G Weatherburn, M Roddie, J Keen, N Muris and MJ Buxton
health Economics Research Group, Brunel University Uxbridge, Middlesex, UK.

This paper describes an investigation into the reasons for variation in the time taken by senior radiologists to complete radiological reports. An observational study of the reporting process at one UK hospital was undertaken for a 25 day period. An independent health service researcher observed the radiology reporting process and collected data on a variety of factors including the time taken to produce the report, the number and nature of all images viewed, the experience of the radiologist, and the number of disturbances that occurred. The nature of the variation in reporting time was explored using both simple comparative statistics and more sophisticated multiple regression techniques. Data were collected on 2345 report observations and the median report time was 117 s. This research provides the first empirical evidence for systematic variation in reporting time. The results confirm the importance of certain factors that were expected to explain report time variation. For example, the results indicate that report time tended to be significantly shorter in reporting sessions that were busy, and significantly longer when the radiologist was disturbed during the reporting process or was training juniors during a reporting session. More surprising were the results indicating that there was no significant difference in report time for reports categorized as urgent or "hot" and those categorized as less urgent or "cold", and that report time appeared to vary systematically depending on the day of the week and on the time of day.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
S. W. Kwan, B. L. Partik, S. E. Zinck, F. P. Chan, S. T. Kee, A. N. Leung, M. Voracek, and G. D. Rubin
Primary Interpretation of Thoracic MDCT Images Using Coronal Reformations
Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2005; 185(6): 1500 - 1508.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
D. T. Gray, W. Hollingworth, C. C. Blackmore, M. A. Alotis, B. I. Martin, S. D. Sullivan, R. A. Deyo, and J. G. Jarvik
Conventional Radiography, Rapid MR Imaging, and Conventional MR Imaging for Low Back Pain: Activity-based Costs and Reimbursement
Radiology, June 1, 2003; 227(3): 669 - 680.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING  ALL BIR JOURNALS 
Copyright © 1995 by the British Institute of Radiology.