Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Reporting: Recommendations/Guidelines

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Quality and Safety in Imaging

Part of the book series: Medical Radiology ((Med Radiol Diagn Imaging))

  • 617 Accesses

Abstract

A core principle of quality improvement for better outcomes is consistency. With the increased use of medical imaging, incidental findings are more commonly being discovered. There is significant variability in the reporting and follow-up regarding incidental findings. This can lead to confusion for the referring physician unless specific guidance is offered by the radiologist. Other guidelines have also been developed for specific conditions and to help guide the management of the patient. The development, implementation, and use of guidelines can help foster consistency and lead to quality improvement.

In this chapter, the scope of the problem and process for development of guidelines will be addressed. Medicolegal and ethical implications of using guidelines are also discussed. Quality is enhanced by decreasing variation in practice and guidelines are an important tool. Guidelines should be broadly acceptable, easy to access, and straightforward to understand and apply. Development of guidelines under the auspices of established professional societies allows for endorsement and dissemination of recommendations. Radiologist adherence to guidelines can enhance informed decision-making, decrease variations in recommendations, decrease cost, and limit medical liability. This has potential to provide standardization, to improve patient care, and to improve confidence of the referring physicians.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • AMA’s Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs (2006) Opinion 8.08—Informed Consent, in Code of Medical Ethics. AMA, Chicago, IL

    Google Scholar 

  • American College of Radiology (2014) Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System ACR.org: American College of Radiology [cited 29 Jul 2016]. Quality & Safety | Additional Resources | LI-RADS. http://www.acr.org/Quality-Safety/Resources/LIRADS

  • American College of Radiology (2016) Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS™). ACR.org: American College of Radiology [cited 29 Jul 2016]. Quality Safety | Additional Resources | Lung-RADS™. http://www.acr.org/Quality-Safety/Resources/LungRADS

  • Baker LC, Atlas SW, Afendulis CC (2008) Expanded use of imaging technology and the challenge of measuring value. Health Aff (Millwood) 27(6):1467–1478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barry MJ, Edgman-Levitan S (2012) Shared decision making—pinnacle of patient-centered care. N Engl J Med 366(9):780–781

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bates DW et al (2003) Ten commandments for effective clinical decision support: making the practice of evidence-based medicine a reality. J Am Med Inform Assoc 10(6):523–530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berland LL (2009a) Incidental extracolonic findings on CT colonography: the impending deluge and its implications. J Am Coll Radiol 6(1):14–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berland LL (2009b) Author’s reply. J Am Coll Radiol 6(8):599–600

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berland LL (2011) The American College of Radiology strategy for managing incidental findings on abdominal computed tomography. Radiol Clin N Am 49(2):237–243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berland LL et al (2010) Managing incidental findings on abdominal CT: white paper of the ACR incidental findings committee. J Am Coll Radiol 7(10):754–773

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berland LL et al (2014) ACR members’ response to JACR white paper on the management of incidental abdominal CT findings. J Am Coll Radiol 11(1):30–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berlin L (2011) The incidentaloma: a medicolegal dilemma. Radiol Clin N Am 49(2):245–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berlin L (2016) Rethinking normal: benefits and risks of not reporting harmless incidental findings. J Am Coll Radiol 13(9):1025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boland GW et al (2011) Decision support for radiologist report recommendations. J Am Coll Radiol 8(12):819–823

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boland GW, Enzmann DR, Duszak R Jr (2014) Actionable reporting. J Am Coll Radiol 11(9):844–845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brink JA (2010) The art and science of medical guidelines: what we know and what we believe. Radiology 254(1):20–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown SD (2013) Professional norms regarding how radiologists handle incidental findings. J Am Coll Radiol 10(4):253–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casarella WJ (2002) A patient’s viewpoint on a current controversy. Radiology 224(3):927

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Court of Appeals of New York (1914) Mary E. Schloendorff v. The Society of the New York Hospital in New York; New England. Court of Appeals of New York p 125; 92

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronan JJ (2008) Thyroid nodules: is it time to turn off the US machines? Radiology 247(3):602–604

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies L, Welch HG (2006) Increasing incidence of thyroid cancer in the United States, 1973–2002. JAMA 295(18):2164–2167

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ding A, Eisenberg JD, Pandharipande PV (2011) The economic burden of incidentally detected findings. Radiol Clin N Am 49(2):257–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doubilet PM, Benson CB, Bourne T, Blaivas M (2014) Pregnancy SoRiUMPoEFTDoMaEoaVI. Diagnostic criteria for nonviable pregnancy early in the first trimester. Ultrasound Q 30(1):3–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg RL, Fleischner S (2013) Ways to improve radiologists’ adherence to Fleischner Society guidelines for management of pulmonary nodules. J Am Coll Radiol 10(6):439–441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg RL, Bankier AA, Boiselle PM (2010) Compliance with Fleischner Society guidelines for management of small lung nodules: a survey of 834 radiologists. Radiology 255(1):218–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein RM, Peters E (2009) Beyond information: exploring patients’ preferences. JAMA 302(2):195–197

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Esserman L, Thompson I (2010) Solving the overdiagnosis dilemma. J Natl Cancer Inst 102(9):582–583

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esserman LJ, Thompson IM Jr, Reid B (2013) Overdiagnosis and overtreatment in cancer: an opportunity for improvement. JAMA 310(8):797–798

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher RH, Pignone M (2008) Extracolonic findings with computed tomographic colonography: asset or liability? Arch Intern Med 168(7):685–686

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flicker MS et al (2008) Economic impact of extracolonic findings at computed tomographic colonography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 32(4):497–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furtado CD et al (2005) Whole-body CT screening: spectrum of findings and recommendations in 1192 patients. Radiology 237(2):385–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gawande A (2015) Overkill. In: The New Yorker. Conde Nast, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh E, Levine D (2013) Recommendations for adnexal cysts: have the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound consensus conference guidelines affected utilization of ultrasound? Ultrasound Q 29(1):21–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gluecker TM et al (2003) Extracolonic findings at CT colonography: evaluation of prevalence and cost in a screening population. Gastroenterology 124(4):911–916

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hara AK et al (2000) Incidental extracolonic findings at CT colonography. Radiology 215(2):353–357

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hassan C et al (2008a) Computed tomographic colonography to screen for colorectal cancer, extracolonic cancer, and aortic aneurysm: model simulation with cost-effectiveness analysis. Arch Intern Med 168(7):696–705

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heath I (2014) Role of fear in overdiagnosis and overtreatment—an essay by Iona Heath. BMJ 349:g6123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heller MT et al (2013) Managing incidental findings on abdominal and pelvic CT and MRI, part 3: white paper of the ACR Incidental Findings Committee II on splenic and nodal findings. J Am Coll Radiol 10(11):833–839

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hellstrom M, Svensson MH, Lasson A (2004) Extracolonic and incidental findings on CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy). Am J Roentgenol 182(3):631–638

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillman BJ (2015) Certainty. J Am Coll Radiol 12(4):321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoang JK et al (2015) Managing incidental thyroid nodules detected on imaging: white paper of the ACR Incidental Thyroid Findings Committee. J Am Coll Radiol 12(2):143–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Institute of Medicine (2011) Clinical practice guidelines we can trust. National Academic Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson PT et al (2011) Common incidental findings on MDCT: survey of radiologist recommendations for patient management. J Am Coll Radiol 8(11):762–767

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khosa F et al (2013) Managing incidental findings on abdominal and pelvic CT and MRI, part 2: white paper of the ACR Incidental Findings Committee II on vascular findings. J Am Coll Radiol 10(10):789–794

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilani RK et al (2011) Self-referral in medical imaging: a meta-analysis of the literature. J Am Coll Radiol 8(7):469–476

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kimberly JR et al (2009) Extracolonic findings at virtual colonoscopy: an important consideration in asymptomatic colorectal cancer screening. J Gen Intern Med 24(1):69–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kucharczyk MJ et al (2011) Assessing the impact of incidental findings in a lung cancer screening study by using low-dose computed tomography. Can Assoc Radiol J 62(2):141–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee CI et al (2010) Incidental extracardiac findings at coronary CT: clinical and economic impact. Am J Roentgenol 194(6):1531–1538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levine D et al (2010) Management of asymptomatic ovarian and other adnexal cysts imaged at US: Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound Consensus Conference Statement. Radiology 256(3):943–954

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu W, Mortele KJ, Silverman SG (2005) Incidental extraurinary findings at MDCT urography in patients with hematuria: prevalence and impact on imaging costs. Am J Roentgenol 185(4):1051–1056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu MT et al (2016) Radiologist point-of-care clinical decision support and adherence to guidelines for incidental lung nodules. J Am Coll Radiol 13(2):156–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Machaalany J et al (2009) Potential clinical and economic consequences of noncardiac incidental findings on cardiac computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 54(16):1533–1541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MACRA (2016) The Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) and Alternative Payment Models (APMs). CMS.gov: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient-Assessment-Instruments/Value-Based-Programs/MACRA-MIPS-and-APMs/MACRA-MIPS-and-APMs.html

  • MacRedmond R et al (2004) Screening for lung cancer using low dose CT scanning. Thorax 59(3):237–241

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Maehara CK, Silverman SG, Lacson R, Khorasani R (2014) Journal club: renal masses detected at abdominal CT: radiologists’ adherence to guidelines regarding management recommendations and communication of critical results. Am J Roentgenol 203(4):828–834

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maizlin ZV et al (2007) Economic and ethical impact of extrarenal findings on potential living kidney donor assessment with computed tomography angiography. Transpl Int 20(4):338–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masciocchi M, Wagner B, Lloyd B (2012) Quality review: Fleischner criteria adherence by radiologists in a large community hospital. J Am Coll Radiol 9(5):336–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Megibow AJ (2011) Preface imaging of incidentalomas. Radiol Clin N Am 49(2):xi–xii

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan MB, Branstetter BF, Clark C, House J, Baker D, Harnsberger HR (2011) Just-in-time radiologist decision support: the importance of PACS-integrated workflow. J Am Coll Radiol 8(7):497–500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan AE et al (2015) Extraurinary incidental findings on CT for hematuria: the radiologist’s role and downstream cost analysis. Am J Roentgenol 204(6):1160–1167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (2012) The guidelines manual. NICE, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Obuchowski NA et al (2007) Total-body screening: preliminary results of a pilot randomized controlled trial. J Am Coll Radiol 4(9):604–611

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pandharipande PV, Herts BR, Gore RM et al (2016) Rethinking normal: benefits and risks of not reporting harmless incidental findings. J Am Coll Radiol 13(7):764–767

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patel MD et al (2013) Managing incidental findings on abdominal and pelvic CT and MRI, part 1: white paper of the ACR Incidental Findings Committee II on adnexal findings. J Am Coll Radiol 10(9):675–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickhardt PJ et al (2008) Unsuspected extracolonic findings at screening CT colonography: clinical and economic impact. Radiology 249(1):151–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • PQRS (2015) Measure #405: appropriate follow-up imaging for incidental abdominal lesions—national quality strategy domain: effective clinical care 2016 PQRS options for individual measures [serial online]. vol Version 10.0. http://www.acr.org/%20~/media/ACR/Documents/P4P/2016%20PQRS/DX/2016_PQRS_Measure_405_11_17_2015.pdf. Accessed 24 Aug 2016

  • PQRSPRO (2016) PQRS Measure #406: appropriate follow-up imaging for incidental thyroid nodules in patients. pqrspro.com: Healthmonix [cited 24 Aug 2016]. https://www.pqrspro.com/cmsmeasures//appropriate_follow-up_imaging_for_incidental_thyroid_nodules_in_patients

  • Reed MH (2015) Evidence for diagnostic imaging guidelines. J Am Coll Radiol 12(4):325–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Remedios D et al (2015) Clinical imaging guidelines part 1: a proposal for uniform methodology. J Am Coll Radiol 12(1):45–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenkrantz AB, Kierans AS (2014) US of incidental adnexal cysts: adherence of radiologists to the 2010 Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound guidelines. Radiology 271(1):262–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schunemann HJ et al (2008) Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies. BMJ 336(7653):1106–1110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sebastian S et al (2013) Managing incidental findings on abdominal and pelvic CT and MRI, part 4: white paper of the ACR Incidental Findings Committee II on gallbladder and biliary findings. J Am Coll Radiol 10(12):953–956

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silverman SG et al (2008) Management of the incidental renal mass. Radiology 249(1):16–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sistrom CL et al (2009) Recommendations for additional imaging in radiology reports: multifactorial analysis of 5.9 million examinations. Radiology 253(2):453–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith-Bindman R, Miglioretti DL, Larson EB (2008) Rising use of diagnostic medical imaging in a large integrated health system. Health Aff (Millwood) 27(6):1491–1502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Song JH, Beland MD, Mayo-Smith WW (2012) Incidental clinically important extraurinary findings at MDCT urography for hematuria evaluation: prevalence in 1209 consecutive examinations. Am J Roentgenol 199(3):616–622

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sosnouski D et al (2007) Extracardiac findings at cardiac CT: a practical approach. J Thorac Imaging 22(1):77–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Truog RD (2012) Patients and doctors—evolution of a relationship. N Engl J Med 366(7):581–585

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tufano RP, Noureldine SI, Angelos P (2015) Ethical responsibilities of caring for patients with incidental thyroid nodules. Thyroid 25(5):467–468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veerappan GR et al (2010) Extracolonic findings on CT colonography increases yield of colorectal cancer screening. Am J Roentgenol 195(3):677–686

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Volk ML, Ubel PA (2011) Better off not knowing: improving clinical care by limiting physician access to unsolicited diagnostic information. Arch Intern Med 171(6):487–488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welch HG (2011) We stumble onto incidentalomas that might be cancer, in overdiagnosed: making people sick in the pursuit of health. Beacon Press, Boston, MA, pp 90–101

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolf SH et al (1999) Clinical guidelines: potential benefits, limitations, and harms of clinical guidelines. BMJ 318(7182):527–530

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Xiong T et al (2005) Incidental lesions found on CT colonography: their nature and frequency. Br J Radiol 78(925):22–29

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Xiong T et al (2006) Resources and costs associated with incidental extracolonic findings from CT colonogaphy: a study in a symptomatic population. Br J Radiol 79(948):948–961

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yee J et al (2010) Extracolonic findings at CT colonography. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 20(2):305–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuiderent-Jerak T, Forland F, Macbeth F (2012) Guidelines should reflect all knowledge, not just clinical trials. BMJ 345:e6702

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 619 19th Street South, JTN 357, Birmingham, AL, 35249, USA

    Jessica G. Zarzour M.D.

  2. Chair, ACR Body Imaging Commission Professor Emeritus, Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 619 19th Street South, JT N455D, Birmingham, AL, 35249, USA

    Lincoln L. Berland M.D., F.A.C.R.

Authors
  1. Jessica G. Zarzour M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lincoln L. Berland M.D., F.A.C.R.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lincoln L. Berland M.D., F.A.C.R. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

    Lluís Donoso-Bach

  2. Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

    Giles W. L. Boland

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Zarzour, J.G., Berland, L.L. (2017). Reporting: Recommendations/Guidelines. In: Donoso-Bach, L., Boland, G. (eds) Quality and Safety in Imaging. Medical Radiology(). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/174_2017_87

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/174_2017_87

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-42576-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-42578-8

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation