Editorial: Reporting radiology results to patients: Keeping them calm versus keeping them under control

Imaging in Medicine

Volumn 2, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 477-482

  Johnson, Annette J ^a  

^a WAKE FOREST SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

communication; medical errors; patient anxiety; patient satisfaction; quality improvement; radiology reports

Indexed keywords

EDITORIAL; HEALTH CARE ACCESS; MEDICAL ERROR; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT RIGHT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

EID: 77958469121     PISSN: 17555191     EISSN: 17555205     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2217/iim.10.42     Document Type: Editorial

References (36)

1. Keselman A, Slaughter L, Smith CA et al.: Towards consumer-friendly PHRs: patients' experience with reviewing their health records. AMIA Symposium Proceedings 399-403 (2007).
2. Matheny ME, Gandhi TK, Orav EJ et al.: Impact of an automated test results management system on patients' satisfaction about test result communication. Arch. Intern. Med. 167(20), 2233-2239 (2007).
3. Johnson AJ, Easterling D, Williams LS, Glover S, Frankel RM: Insight from patients for radiologists: improving our reporting systems. J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 6(11), 786-794 (2009).
4. Ralston JD, Carrell D, Reid R, Anderson M, Moran M, Hereford J: Patient web services integrated with a shared medical record: patient use and satisfaction. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 14, 798-806 (2007).
5. Tang PC, Ash JS, Bates DW, Overhage JM, Sands DZ: Personal health records: definitions, benefits, and strategies for overcoming barriers to adoption. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 13(2), 121-126 (2006).
6. Johnson AJ, Frankel RM, Williams LS, Glover S, Easterling D: Patient access to radiology reports: what do physicians think? J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 7(4), 281-289 (2010).
7. Schreiber MH, Leonard M, Rieniets CY: Disclosure of imaging findings to patients directly by radiologists: survey of patient preferences. Am. J. Roentgenol. 165, 467-469 (1995).
8. Kerner JF, Yedidia M, Padgett D et al.: Realizing the promise of breast cancer screening: clinical follow-up after abnormal screening among Black women. Prev. Med. 37, 92-101 (2003).
9. Hassol A, Walker JM, Kidder D et al.: Patient experiences and attitudes about access to a patient electronic health care record and linked web messaging. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 11(6), 505-513 (2004).
10. Brenner RJ: Breast cancer evaluation: medical legal issues. Breast J. 1, 6-9 (2004).
11. Biggerstaff PI: Stanley v. McCarver: formal doctor-patient relationship not required for negligence liability. Ariz. Law Rev. 47, 223-227 (2005).
12. Raskin MM: Survival strategies for radiology: some practical tips on how to reduce the risk of being sued and losing. J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 3(9), 689-693 (2006).
13. Berlin L: Standards for radiology interpretation and reporting in the emergency setting. Pediatr. Radiol. 38(Suppl. 4), S639-S644 (2008).
14. Berlin L: Duty to directly communicate radiologic abnormalities: has the pendulum swung too far? Am. J. Roentgenol. 181, 375-381 (2003).
15. Kushner DC, Lucey LL: Diagnostic radiology reporting and communication: the ACR guideline. J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 2(1), 15-21 (2005).
16. Brenner RJ, Bartholomew L: Communication errors in radiology: a liability cost analysis. J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 2(5), 428-431 (2005).
17. Institute of Medicine: Improving the 21st-century health care system. In: Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. National Academy Press, Washington DC, USA, 39-60 (2001).
18. Institute of Medicine: Executive summary. In: Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. National Academy Press, Washington DC, USA, 1-22 (2001).
19. Ryan RM, Kuhl J, Deci EL: Nature and autonomy: organizational view of social and neurobiological aspects of self-regulation in behavior and development. Dev. Psychopathol. 9, 701-728 (1997).
20. Ryan RM, Deci EL: Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am. Psychol. 55, 68-78 (2000).
21. Williams GC, Frankel RM, Campbell TL, Deci EL: Research on relationship-centered care and healthcare outcomes from the Rochester Biopsychosocial Program: a self-determination theory integration. Fam. Syst. Health 18, 79-90 (2000).
22. Silva MN, Vieira PN, Coutinho SR et al.: Using self-determination theory to promote physical activity and weight control: a randomized controlled trial in women. J. Behav. Med. 33, 110-122 (2010).
23. Williams GC, Lynch M, Glasgow RE: Computer-assisted intervention improves patient-centered diabetes care by increasing autonomy support. Health Psychol. 26(6), 728-734 (2007).
24. Williams GC, Niemiec CP, Patrick H, Ryan RM, Deci EL: The importance of supporting autonomy and perceived competence in facilitating long-term tobacco abstinence. Ann. Behav. Med. 37, 315-324 (2009).
25. Stack AG, Martini DR: Association of patient autonomy with increased transplantation and survival among new dialysis patients in the United States. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 45(4), 730-742 (2005).
26. Degner LF, Kristjanson LJ, Bowman D et al.: Information needs and decisional preferences in women with breast cancer. JAMA 277, 1485-1492 (1997).
27. Kaplan SH, Greenfield S, Gandek B, Rogers WH, Ware JE: Characteristics of physicians with participatory decision-making styles. Ann. Int. Med. 124, 497-504 (1996).
28. Ryan J, Sysko J: The contingency of patient preferences for involvement in health decision making. Health Care Manage. Rev. 32, 30-36 (2007).
29. Deci EL, Eghrari H, Patrick BC, Leone DR: Facilitating internalization: the selfdetermination theory perspective. J. Pers. 62, 119-142 (1994).
30. Ryan RM, Deci EL: Self-regulation and the problem of human autonomy: does psychology need choice, self-determination, and will? J. Pers. 74, 1557-1585 (2006).
31. Waller BN: The psychological structure of patient autonomy. Camb. Q. Healthc. Ethic. 11, 257-265 (2002).
32. Jacobson N: Dignity and health: a review. Soc. Sci. Med. 64, 292-302 (2007).
33. Deber RB, Kraetschmer N, Irvine J: What role do patients wish to play in treatment decision making? Arch. Int. Med. 156, 1414-1420 (1996).
34. Davies M, Elwyn G: Advocating mandatory patient "autonomy" in healthcare: adverse reactions and side effects. Health Care Anal. 16, 315-318 (2008).
35. Pew Internet & American Life Project: patient choice in health information technology www.pewinternet.org/ Presentations/2009/32-Patient- Choice-in-Health-Information-Technology.aspx
36. The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH) Act ARRA Components - 6 January, 2009 www.hipaasurvivalguide.com/ hitech-act-text. php