Identifying the target: An audit of radiology reports for appropriate use of slice reference numbers
Rachael Wooder,
United Kingdom
PO-1273
Abstract
Identifying the target: An audit of radiology reports for appropriate use of slice reference numbers
Authors: Rachael Wooder1, Neil Bayman2, Clara Chan2, Joanna Coote2, Corinne Faivre-Finn2, Margaret Harris2, Steven O'Hare3, Laura Pemberton2, Ahmed Salem2, Hamid Sheikh2, Michelle Sumner3, Sean Tenant4, David Woolf2
1The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Christie medical physics and engineering , Manchester, United Kingdom; 2The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Networked services, clinical oncology, Manchester, United Kingdom; 3The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Christie medical physics and engineering, Manchester, United Kingdom; 4The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Radiology, Manchester, United Kingdom
Show Affiliations
Hide Affiliations
Purpose or Objective
As the capabilities of diagnostic
imaging have advanced, higher levels of spatial resolution identify smaller lung
abnormalities. Radiation oncologists are treating smaller and more ill defined
targets. Many patients with lung cancer will have a background of chronic lung
disease with associated abnormalities (e.g. small equivocal nodules) identified
at the time of the RT planning scan. Guidance in the UK recommend references to
image slices in the radiology reports to help the reader clearly identify
abnormalities but this is not compulsory.
Material and Methods
A retrospective
review of the CT and PET reports of thirty patients (4
metastatic and 26 primary lung cancer) who received lung SABR
to ascertain if the target lesion was clearly identified with a slice reference
number.
Results
24 patients (80%)
had a slice reference number clearly identifying the target lesion. Out of theses 8 had detailed
reports with slice reference numbers identifying the target lesion and benign
abnormalities or areas requiring surveillance. 7 patients out of 30 had
additional lesions visible on the RT planning scan which had previously been reported
on diagnostic imaging and under surveillance. There was no slice reference
number clearly distinguishing the lesion requiring treatment and that under
surveillance for 3 of these patients.
Conclusion
Slice
reference numbers were included in most but not all radiology reports. Where
there are multiple lesions under surveillance slice reference numbers are
beneficial in target lesion identification. Inclusion of slice reference
numbers could be advocated as part of an error reduction strategy which would
reduce the risk of the target being incorrectly delineated.