Objectives <p>To quantify reporting preferences and communication barriers between neuroradiologists and neuro-associated clinicians at a tertiary neuroscience center.</p> Materials and methods <p>Two near-identical, multilingual online surveys (17 questions) were distributed to neuroradiologists and clinicians in neurology, neurosurgery, and otorhinolaryngology. The surveys included demographic questions, satisfaction assessments, and report-related preferences. Data analysis was performed using descriptive statistics (frequencies and percentages).</p> Results <p>Responses were obtained from 80 physicians (21 neuroradiologists; 59 clinicians). Most clinicians reported reading the entire report (59.3%); subspecialty differences were not significant (chi-square test, <i>p</i> = 0.59). In a stroke scenario, context-based structured reports were preferred by 45.8% of clinicians, in contrast to only by 9.5% of neuroradiologists. Standardized classifications and quantitative measurements were endorsed often/always by 59.3%, and key images were considered useful routinely or in complex cases by 89.8% of clinicians. For the clinical neuro-related subspecialties, no significant between-group difference in impact ratings was observed (chi-square test, <i>p</i> = 0.25). Neuroradiologists indicated that more detailed clinical information would be beneficial.</p> Conclusion <p>Clinicians favor context-based structured reporting with classifications, quantitative measurements, and key images, whereas neuroradiologists predominantly prefer conventional formats. Adopting context-based templates with clear governance may help align expectations and support interdisciplinary workflows.</p> Critical relevance statement <p>More focused and detailed clinical information, together with greater use of context-based structured reports incorporating classifications, quantitative measurements, and key images, may facilitate clearer communication between radiologists and clinicians and better support tailored clinical decision-making workflows.</p> Key Points <p><UnorderedList Mark="Bullet"> <ItemContent> <p>Interdisciplinary reporting needs in neuroradiology were assessed by surveys.</p> </ItemContent> <ItemContent> <p>Clinicians favor context-based structured reports and standardized content.</p> </ItemContent> <ItemContent> <p>Referral quality and report design are modifiable barriers to improving workflow.</p> </ItemContent> </UnorderedList></p> Graphical Abstract <p></p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Decoding collaboration obstacles: a survey on reporting preferences between neuroradiologists and clinical specialists

  • Felix Gunzer,
  • Giovanna Brandi,
  • Reza Seiffert,
  • Thomas Frauenfelder,
  • Zsolt Kulcsar,
  • Till Sprenger,
  • Meritxell Garcia Alzamora

摘要

Objectives

To quantify reporting preferences and communication barriers between neuroradiologists and neuro-associated clinicians at a tertiary neuroscience center.

Materials and methods

Two near-identical, multilingual online surveys (17 questions) were distributed to neuroradiologists and clinicians in neurology, neurosurgery, and otorhinolaryngology. The surveys included demographic questions, satisfaction assessments, and report-related preferences. Data analysis was performed using descriptive statistics (frequencies and percentages).

Results

Responses were obtained from 80 physicians (21 neuroradiologists; 59 clinicians). Most clinicians reported reading the entire report (59.3%); subspecialty differences were not significant (chi-square test, p = 0.59). In a stroke scenario, context-based structured reports were preferred by 45.8% of clinicians, in contrast to only by 9.5% of neuroradiologists. Standardized classifications and quantitative measurements were endorsed often/always by 59.3%, and key images were considered useful routinely or in complex cases by 89.8% of clinicians. For the clinical neuro-related subspecialties, no significant between-group difference in impact ratings was observed (chi-square test, p = 0.25). Neuroradiologists indicated that more detailed clinical information would be beneficial.

Conclusion

Clinicians favor context-based structured reporting with classifications, quantitative measurements, and key images, whereas neuroradiologists predominantly prefer conventional formats. Adopting context-based templates with clear governance may help align expectations and support interdisciplinary workflows.

Critical relevance statement

More focused and detailed clinical information, together with greater use of context-based structured reports incorporating classifications, quantitative measurements, and key images, may facilitate clearer communication between radiologists and clinicians and better support tailored clinical decision-making workflows.

Key Points

Interdisciplinary reporting needs in neuroradiology were assessed by surveys.

Clinicians favor context-based structured reports and standardized content.

Referral quality and report design are modifiable barriers to improving workflow.

Graphical Abstract