Structured Reporting of Superficial Soft Tissue Masses on Ultrasonography: A Closed-Loop Clinical Audit From a Tertiary Care Hospital in Pakistan

• Published in: Curēus (Palo Alto, CA) Vol. 16; no. 6; p. e61884
• Main Authors: Asif, Muhammad Ahsan, Zahid, Abdul Subhan, Naseer, Ayesha, Khan, Muhammad Ubaid Ullah, Bhatti, Zaeem, Khan, Muhammad Waris W, Nizami, Muhammad Faraz K, Shehzad, Khunsha, Younas, Usama Afraz, Ahmad, Haseeb, Mehmood Qadri, Haseeb, Bilal, Saira
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Cureus Inc 07-06-2024; Cureus
• Subjects: Audits; Hospitals; Magnetic resonance imaging; Medical Education; Medical imaging; Quality Improvement; Radiology; Ultrasonic imaging; X-rays; United States > US; Lahore Pakistan; Pakistan; ultrasound reporting; audit; radiology; quality improvement study; superficial mass; pakistan; residents; research; ultrasound
• DOI: 10.7759/cureus.61884
• EISSN: 2168-8184

Background Among all the modalities of diagnostic radiology, ultrasonography is considered the least invasive one. However, this benefit usually comes at the cost of its subjective evaluation since it is purely a dynamic diagnostic modality. Thus, instead of ultrasonography, most clinicians usually rely on the report written by the radiologist. Objective The objective of this study is to evaluate the clinical practices of ultrasound reporting of superficial soft tissue masses. Materials and methods A closed-loop retrospective and prospective study was conducted at the Department of Radiology and Medical Imaging, Jinnah Hospital, Lahore between December 2023 and March 2024. In the pre-intervention phase, a randomly collected sample of 100 ultrasound reports documenting superficial soft tissue masses were included in the study and judged against standard criteria set by the Royal College of Radiologists (RCR). The intervention phase included regular presentations, identification of problems, and designing of preformed reporting forms. Post-intervention assessments were based on the judgment of 100 ultrasound reports in each cycle twice. Intervention and post-intervention assessments were done twice to correct the ongoing practices. Results During the pre-intervention phase, the ultrasound reports issued by the department of study showed only 41.5% compliance with the RCR structured reporting guidelines. However, after the first and second post-intervention phases, this percentage increased up to 98.3%. Overall, we observed a compliance difference of 56.5% between the pre-intervention and second post-intervention phases. Conclusion Integration of methods, such as briefing the residents on RCR guidelines, displaying parameters, and making structured report templates available, can greatly increase adherence to RCR guidelines for structured ultrasonography reporting. It also greatly enhances the comprehensiveness and reliability of ultrasonography reports for clinicians. Clinical audits should be routinely practiced in the settings of radiology.