Flying in the Plane You Service: Patient-Centered Radiology

Journal of the American College of Radiology

Volumn 7, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 216-221

  Swensen, Stephen J ^a   Johnson, C Daniel ^b  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

^b MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

Author keywords

outcomes; Patient centered; quality; safety; service; transparency

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL EXAMINATION; CLINICAL PRACTICE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH SERVICE; MEDICAL INFORMATION; PATIENT SAFETY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; REVIEW;

EID: 84928095979     PISSN: 15461440     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2009.10.017     Document Type: Review

References (34)

1. Beam C.A., Layde P.M., and Sullivan D.C. Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists. Arch Intern Med 156 (1996) 209-213
2. American College of Radiology. Practice guidelines and technical standards. http://www.acr.org/SecondaryMainMenuCategories/quality_safety/guidelines.aspx Accessed August 8, 2009
3. de Brantes F. Bridges to excellence: a program to start closing the quality chasm in healthcare. J Healthcare Qual 25 (2003) 2 11
4. Hayes J.C. Utilization management: exec panel reveals keys to the system. http://www.diagnosticimaging.com/display/article/113619/1193592?verify=0 Accessed March 8, 2009
5. Jarvik J.G., Hollingworth W., Martin B., et al. Rapid magnetic resonance imaging vs radiographs for patients with low back pain. JAMA 289 (2003) 2810-2818
6. Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy & Clinical Practice. The Dartmouth atlas of health care. http://www.dartmouthatlas.org Accessed August 14, 2009
7. Lurie J.D., Birkmeyer N.J., and Weinstein J.N. Rates of advanced spinal imaging and spine surgery. Spine 28 (2003) 616-620
8. Gottlieb R.H. Imaging for whom: patient or physician?. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195 (2005) 1399-1403
9. Gottlieb R.H., La T.C., Erturk E.N., et al. CT in detecting urinary tract calculi: influence on patient imaging and clinical outcomes. Radiology 225 (2002) 441-449
10. Sistrom C.L. The appropriateness of imaging: a comprehensive conceptual framework. Radiology 251 (2009) 637-649
11. Stiell I.G., Clement C.M., Rowe B.H., et al. Comparison of the Canadian CT head rule and the New Orleans criteria in patients with minor head injury. JAMA 294 (2005) 1511-1518
12. Wolf A.B., and Brem R.F. Decreased mammography utilization in the United States: why reverse the trend?. AJR Am J Roentgenol 192 (2009) 400-402
13. Moser J.W., and Hastreiter D.M. 2007 survey of radiologists: source of income and impact of the deficit reduction act of 2005. J Am Coll Radiol 6 (2009) 408-416
14. The Joint Commission. Sentinel event statistics as of: September 30, 2009. http://www.jointcommission.org/NR/rdonlyres/377FF7E7-F565-4D61-9FD2-593CA688135B/0/SE_Stats_9_09.pdf Accessed December 28, 2009
15. The United States Pharmacopeial Convention. MEDMARX® data report: a chartbook of 2000-2004 findings from intensive care units and radiological services. Rockville, Md: The United States Pharmacopeial Convention.
16. Mizrahi T. Managing medical mistakes: ideology, insularity and accountability among internists-in-training. Soc Sci Med 19 (1984) 135-146
17. Dawson D., and Reid K. Fatigue, alcohol and performance impairment. Nature 388 (1997) 235
18. Landrigan C.P., Rothschild J.M., Cronin J.W., et al. Effect of reducing interns' work hours on serious medical errors in intensive care units. N Engl J Med 351 (2004) 1838-1848
19. Fidler J.L., MacCarty R.L., Swensen S.J., et al. Feasibility of using a walking workstation during CT image interpretation. J Am Coll Radiol 5 (2008) 1130-1136
20. Frush D.P. Radiation, CT and children: the simple answer is ... it's complicated. Radiology 252 (2009) 4-6
21. Brenner D.J., and Hall E.J. Computed tomography-an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 357 (2007) 2277-2284
22. Sidhu M., Coley B.D., Connolly B., et al. Image Gently, Step Lightly: Increasing radiation dose awareness in pediatric interventional radiology. Pediatric Radiology 39 (2009) 1135-1138 Heidelberg: Springer Berlin
23. Berlin L. Malpractice and radiologists, update 1986: an 11.5-year perspective. Am J Roentgenol 147 (1986) 1291-1298
24. Berlin L., and Berlin J.W. Malpractice and radiologists in Cook County, IL: trends in 20 years of litigation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 165 (1995) 781-788
25. Sickles E.A., Wolverton D.E., and Dee K.E. Performance parameters for screening and diagnostic mammography: specialist and general radiologists. Radiology 224 (2002) 861-869
26. Johnson C.D., Krecke K.N., Miranda R., Roberts C.C., and Denham C. Quality initiatives: developing a radiology quality and safety program: a primer. Radiographics 29 (2009) 951-959
27. Reiner B.I., Knight N., and Siegel E.L. Radiology reporting, past, present and future: the radiologist's perspective. J Am Coll Radiol 4 (2007) 313-319
28. Schreiber M.H., Leonard Jr. M., and Rieniets C.Y. Disclosure of imaging findings to patients directly by radiologists: survey of patients' preferences. AJR Am J Roentgenol 165 (1995) 467-469
29. Anderson G.F., Reinhardt U.E., Hussey P.S., and Petrosyan V. It's the price, stupid: why the United States is so different from other countries. Health Aff 22 (2003) 89-105
30. Collins J. Good to great: why some companies make the leap ... and others don't (2001), HarperCollins, New York 41-64
31. Weisman J. Bush report offers positive outlook on jobsThe Washington Post (February 10, 2004). http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A26982-2004Feb9?language=printer Accessed December 28, 2009
32. Gladwell M. The picture problem-mammography, air power, and the limits of looking. The New Yorker (December 13, 2004)
33. Swensen S.J., and Johnson C.D. Radiologic quality and safety: mapping value into radiology. J Am Coll Radiol 2 (2005) 992-1000
34. Turner Y., and Hadas-Halpern I. The effects of including a patient's photograph to the radiographic examination. [abstract] (2008) Present at: Annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America; Chicago, Ill