Radiology decision support tools are a bit like sunscreen – they can keep you from getting burned, but only if you bother to use them. That’s the conclusion of a new study in the July issue of the Journal of the American College of Radiology.
Radiology decision support tools are a bit like sunscreen – they can keep you from getting burned, but only if you bother to use them. That’s the conclusion of a new study in the July issue of the Journal of the American College of Radiology.
Researchers led by Matthew B. Morgan, MD, MS, wanted to know how much difference the integration – and therefore more convenient access for busy doctors – of decision support systms with picture archiving and communication systems (PACS) makes. Most decision support systems require radiologists to exit the PACS environment, which may deter busy clinicians from using it decision support.
Forty-eight radiology residents were randomly assigned to one of two groups: the control group had access to a radiology clinical decision support tool via standard Web browser access, which required manual login. The experimental group was provided access to the same tool through a one-click launch from within PACS with an automated login. Halfway through the 10-month study period, the groups were switched.
Results showed that the experimental (integrated) group used decision support three times more than the control group. When integrated access was removed from the experimental group, their use fell by 52 percent. When integrated access was granted to the control group, their use rose by 20 percent.
Although both methods of decision support showed increases in usage over the first five months of the study, the results confirmed a strong association between integration and use, Morgan said.
“Decision support tools that are embedded into the clinical workflow have the best chance of improving quality of care,” he said. “Embedding decision support tools into the workflow is an effective way to increase usage. While this may seem intuitive, not enough is done by PACS vendors and radiology IT groups in this regard.”
Could Lymph Node Distribution Patterns on CT Improve Staging for Colon Cancer?
April 11th 2025For patients with microsatellite instability-high colon cancer, distribution-based clinical lymph node staging (dCN) with computed tomography (CT) offered nearly double the accuracy rate of clinical lymph node staging in a recent study.
The Reading Room Podcast: Current Perspectives on the Updated Appropriate Use Criteria for Brain PET
March 18th 2025In a new podcast, Satoshi Minoshima, M.D., Ph.D., and James Williams, Ph.D., share their insights on the recently updated appropriate use criteria for amyloid PET and tau PET in patients with mild cognitive impairment.
Could Ultrafast MRI Enhance Detection of Malignant Foci for Breast Cancer?
April 10th 2025In a new study involving over 120 women, nearly two-thirds of whom had a family history of breast cancer, ultrafast MRI findings revealed a 5 percent increase in malignancy risk for each second increase in the difference between lesion and background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) time to enhancement (TTE).
AMA Approves Category III CPT Codes for AI-Enabled Perivascular Fat Analysis from CT Scans
April 9th 2025Going into effect in 2026, the new CPT codes may facilitate increased adoption of the CaRi-Heart software for detecting coronary inflammation from computed tomography scans pending FDA clearance of the technology.