title: Radiology by nonradiologists: is report documentation adequate?
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To determine if the quality of medical imaging reports differs significantly between radiologists and nonradiologists.
  
  
  METHODS
  A retrospective nonblinded review of randomly selected chest and long bone x-ray reports by orthopedists and primary care physicians compared with randomly selected imaging reports generated by radiologists.
  
  
  METHODS
  We randomly selected 1 report from each of 50 high self-referring physicians privileged by 2 metropolitan New York area health plans for both bone and joint studies and chest x-rays for a total of 200 reports (50 bone and joint x-rays from each plan and 50 chest x-rays from each plan). We compared them with 50 randomly selected radiologist-generated reports. The reports were evaluated for quality based on the American College of Radiology's Guideline for Communication: Diagnostic Radiology. The data were analyzed by the 2-sample t-test between proportions at the 95% confidence interval.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Radiologists consistently provided higher-quality medical imaging reports than nonradiologists.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  To improve imaging service quality, all providers should be held to the same standards for reporting and communication of results.
authors.affiliation: CareCore National, LLC, Wappingers Falls, NY, USA. sweiner@carecorenational.com.
authors.forename: Shelley Nan
authors.initials: SN
authors.lastname: Weiner
mesh_terms: D002983:Clinical Competence; D003142:Communication; D004282:Documentation / Q000592:standards*; D006801:Humans; D008329:Managed Care Programs; D008485:Medical Audit; D009519:New York City; D009985:Orthopedics / Q000592:standards*; D011320:Primary Health Care / Q000592:standards*; D011785:Quality Assurance, Health Care; D011871:Radiology / Q000592:standards*; D011872:Radiology Department, Hospital / Q000458:organization & administration*; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D013038:Specialization