Impact of Structured Reporting of Skeletal Survey in Skeletal Dysplasia: A Single Institution Experience

Abstract

Background Structured reporting has the advantages of reducing ambiguity in written radiology reports with greater uniformity and comparability of reports amongst different institutes. It has multiple facets: structured format, structured content, and standardized language. While structured reporting initiative has been used in various radiology subspecialties such as oncology, cardiothoracic, abdominal and interventional radiology; skeletal dysplasia is a domain that remains largely untouched by this concept. Purpose To evaluate the impact of structured reporting in skeletal dysplasia. Methods and Materials This was an ethically approved pragmatic clinical trial. A defined number (75) of clinically diagnosed and/or genetically confirmed skeletal dysplasia radiographs were evaluated by two radiologists (reader A and reader B) with 5-and 7-years' experience in general radiology, respectively. A pre-defined structured reporting format for skeletal dysplasia was used as an interventional tool. Both the readers interpreted the radiographs before and after the training session. In addition to diagnosis, diagnostic confidence was noted using a semiquantitative scale. Improvement in diagnostic accuracy and diagnostic confidence after training were assessed. McNemar's test was used to assess the statistical significance of difference in proportion of correct diagnoses in pre- and post-education phases. An interrater reliability analysis using the Kappa statistic was performed to determine interobserver agreement between readers both in pre- and post-education phases. Results In the post-education phase, the proportion of accurate diagnosis improved from 48% (36/75) to 64% (48/75) for reader A, and from 44% (33/75) to 60% (45/75) for reader B as compared with the pre-education phase. Amongst the cases with a correct radiologic diagnosis, an increase in diagnostic confidence was noted in 18 cases for reader A, and 15 cases for reader B. In none of the cases, there was a reduction in diagnostic confidence after training. A McNemar's test determined that there was a statistically significant difference in the proportion of correct diagnoses in pre- and post-education phases, p < 0.001. The interobserver agreement between the readers was found to increase from Kappa = 0.33 (p = 0.004) using non-structured reporting in pre-education phase to Kappa = 0.46 (p < 0.001) using structured reporting in the post-education phase. Conclusion A structured reporting of skeletal survey can improve accuracy and confidence in diagnosing skeletal dysplasia.

Keywords

• skeletal dysplasia
• structured reporting
• skeletal survey