Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Quality metrics currently used in academic radiology departments: results of the QUALMET survey

View through CrossRef
Objective: We present the results of the 2015 quality metrics (QUALMET) survey, which was designed to assess the commonalities and variability of selected quality and productivity metrics currently employed by a large sample of academic radiology departments representing all regions in the USA. Methods: The survey of key radiology metrics was distributed in March–April of 2015 via personal e-mail to 112 academic radiology departments. Results: There was a 34.8% institutional response rate. We found that most academic departments of radiology commonly utilize metrics of hand hygiene, report turn around time (RTAT), relative value unit (RVU) productivity, patient satisfaction and participation in peer review. RTAT targets were found to vary widely. The implementation of radiology peer review and the variety of ways in which peer review results are used within academic radiology departments, the use of clinical decision support tools and requirements for radiologist participation in Maintenance of Certification also varied. Policies for hand hygiene and critical results communication were very similar across all institutions reporting, and most departments utilized some form of missed case/difficult case conference as part of their quality and safety programme, as well as some form of periodic radiologist performance reviews. Conclusion: Results of the QUALMET survey suggest many similarities in tracking and utilization of the selected quality and productivity metrics included in our survey. Use of quality indicators is not a fully standardized process among academic radiology departments. Advances in knowledge: This article examines the current quality and productivity metrics in academic radiology.
Title: Quality metrics currently used in academic radiology departments: results of the QUALMET survey
Description:
Objective: We present the results of the 2015 quality metrics (QUALMET) survey, which was designed to assess the commonalities and variability of selected quality and productivity metrics currently employed by a large sample of academic radiology departments representing all regions in the USA.
Methods: The survey of key radiology metrics was distributed in March–April of 2015 via personal e-mail to 112 academic radiology departments.
Results: There was a 34.
8% institutional response rate.
We found that most academic departments of radiology commonly utilize metrics of hand hygiene, report turn around time (RTAT), relative value unit (RVU) productivity, patient satisfaction and participation in peer review.
RTAT targets were found to vary widely.
The implementation of radiology peer review and the variety of ways in which peer review results are used within academic radiology departments, the use of clinical decision support tools and requirements for radiologist participation in Maintenance of Certification also varied.
Policies for hand hygiene and critical results communication were very similar across all institutions reporting, and most departments utilized some form of missed case/difficult case conference as part of their quality and safety programme, as well as some form of periodic radiologist performance reviews.
Conclusion: Results of the QUALMET survey suggest many similarities in tracking and utilization of the selected quality and productivity metrics included in our survey.
Use of quality indicators is not a fully standardized process among academic radiology departments.
Advances in knowledge: This article examines the current quality and productivity metrics in academic radiology.

Related Results

Non-Recommended Publishing Lists: Strategies for Detecting Deceitful Journals
Non-Recommended Publishing Lists: Strategies for Detecting Deceitful Journals
Abstract The rapid growth of open access publishing (OAP) has significantly improved the accessibility and dissemination of scientific knowledge. However, this expansion has also c...
AI and Incidental Findings
AI and Incidental Findings
Photo by Accuray on Unsplash INTRODUCTION Delayed and missed follow-up on incidental findings threatens patient health and is a major financial risk for healthcare systems. The hea...
État des lieux de la radioprotection du personnel de services d’imagerie médicale du sud Benin en 2019
État des lieux de la radioprotection du personnel de services d’imagerie médicale du sud Benin en 2019
Objectives: To assess the radiation protection of the personnel in radiology departments of South Benin. Materials and method: Cross-sectional descriptive study with a prospective...
Evolution of Academic Emergency Medicine over a Decade (1991‐2001)
Evolution of Academic Emergency Medicine over a Decade (1991‐2001)
Abstract Objective: To test the hypothesis that emergency medicine (EM) has made significant, quantifiable progress within U.S. academic medicine over the past ten years, 1991‐2001...
Abstract 139: Costs to Implement Components of Stroke Systems of Care Under the Paul Coverdell National Acute Stroke Program
Abstract 139: Costs to Implement Components of Stroke Systems of Care Under the Paul Coverdell National Acute Stroke Program
Objective: During 2012-2015, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Paul Coverdell National Acute Stroke Program (PCNASP) funded state health department...

Back to Top