Effects of a proposed quality improvement process in the proportion of the reported ultrasound findings unsupported by stored images

Mauro Schenone, Sarah Ziebarth, Jose Duncan, Lea Stokes, Angela Hernandez

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objectives: To investigate the proportion of documented ultrasound findings that were unsupported by stored ultrasound images in the obstetric ultrasound unit, before and after the implementation of a quality improvement process consisting of a checklist and feedback. Methods: A quality improvement process was created involving utilization of a checklist and feedback from physician to sonographer. The feedback was based on findings of the physician’s review of the report and images using a check list. To assess the impact of this process, two groups were compared. Group 1 consisted of 58 ultrasound reports created prior to initiation of the process. Group 2 included 65 ultrasound reports created after process implementation. Each chart was reviewed by a physician and a sonographer. Findings considered unsupported by stored images by both reviewers were used for analysis, and the proportion of unsupported findings was compared between the two groups. Results are expressed as mean ± standard error. A p value of <.05 was used to determine statistical significance. Results: Univariate analysis of baseline characteristics and potential confounders showed no statistically significant difference between the groups. The mean proportion of unsupported findings in Group 1 was 5.1 ± 0.87, with Group 2 having a significantly lower proportion (2.6 ± 0.62) (p value =.018). Conclusions: Results suggest a significant decrease in the proportion of unsupported findings in ultrasound reports after quality improvement process implementation. Thus, we present a simple yet effective quality improvement process to reduce unsupported ultrasound findings.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2328-2331
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine
Volume32
Issue number14
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 18 2019

Fingerprint

Quality Improvement
Checklist
Physicians
Group Processes
Obstetrics

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

Effects of a proposed quality improvement process in the proportion of the reported ultrasound findings unsupported by stored images. / Schenone, Mauro; Ziebarth, Sarah; Duncan, Jose; Stokes, Lea; Hernandez, Angela.

In: Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine, Vol. 32, No. 14, 18.07.2019, p. 2328-2331.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{9e2f1d9aea464fc6a7ef6b926c7dadf9,
title = "Effects of a proposed quality improvement process in the proportion of the reported ultrasound findings unsupported by stored images",
abstract = "Objectives: To investigate the proportion of documented ultrasound findings that were unsupported by stored ultrasound images in the obstetric ultrasound unit, before and after the implementation of a quality improvement process consisting of a checklist and feedback. Methods: A quality improvement process was created involving utilization of a checklist and feedback from physician to sonographer. The feedback was based on findings of the physician’s review of the report and images using a check list. To assess the impact of this process, two groups were compared. Group 1 consisted of 58 ultrasound reports created prior to initiation of the process. Group 2 included 65 ultrasound reports created after process implementation. Each chart was reviewed by a physician and a sonographer. Findings considered unsupported by stored images by both reviewers were used for analysis, and the proportion of unsupported findings was compared between the two groups. Results are expressed as mean ± standard error. A p value of <.05 was used to determine statistical significance. Results: Univariate analysis of baseline characteristics and potential confounders showed no statistically significant difference between the groups. The mean proportion of unsupported findings in Group 1 was 5.1 ± 0.87, with Group 2 having a significantly lower proportion (2.6 ± 0.62) (p value =.018). Conclusions: Results suggest a significant decrease in the proportion of unsupported findings in ultrasound reports after quality improvement process implementation. Thus, we present a simple yet effective quality improvement process to reduce unsupported ultrasound findings.",
author = "Mauro Schenone and Sarah Ziebarth and Jose Duncan and Lea Stokes and Angela Hernandez",
year = "2019",
month = "7",
day = "18",
doi = "10.1080/14767058.2018.1432587",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "32",
pages = "2328--2331",
journal = "Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine",
issn = "1476-7058",
publisher = "Informa Healthcare",
number = "14",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effects of a proposed quality improvement process in the proportion of the reported ultrasound findings unsupported by stored images

AU - Schenone, Mauro

AU - Ziebarth, Sarah

AU - Duncan, Jose

AU - Stokes, Lea

AU - Hernandez, Angela

PY - 2019/7/18

Y1 - 2019/7/18

N2 - Objectives: To investigate the proportion of documented ultrasound findings that were unsupported by stored ultrasound images in the obstetric ultrasound unit, before and after the implementation of a quality improvement process consisting of a checklist and feedback. Methods: A quality improvement process was created involving utilization of a checklist and feedback from physician to sonographer. The feedback was based on findings of the physician’s review of the report and images using a check list. To assess the impact of this process, two groups were compared. Group 1 consisted of 58 ultrasound reports created prior to initiation of the process. Group 2 included 65 ultrasound reports created after process implementation. Each chart was reviewed by a physician and a sonographer. Findings considered unsupported by stored images by both reviewers were used for analysis, and the proportion of unsupported findings was compared between the two groups. Results are expressed as mean ± standard error. A p value of <.05 was used to determine statistical significance. Results: Univariate analysis of baseline characteristics and potential confounders showed no statistically significant difference between the groups. The mean proportion of unsupported findings in Group 1 was 5.1 ± 0.87, with Group 2 having a significantly lower proportion (2.6 ± 0.62) (p value =.018). Conclusions: Results suggest a significant decrease in the proportion of unsupported findings in ultrasound reports after quality improvement process implementation. Thus, we present a simple yet effective quality improvement process to reduce unsupported ultrasound findings.

AB - Objectives: To investigate the proportion of documented ultrasound findings that were unsupported by stored ultrasound images in the obstetric ultrasound unit, before and after the implementation of a quality improvement process consisting of a checklist and feedback. Methods: A quality improvement process was created involving utilization of a checklist and feedback from physician to sonographer. The feedback was based on findings of the physician’s review of the report and images using a check list. To assess the impact of this process, two groups were compared. Group 1 consisted of 58 ultrasound reports created prior to initiation of the process. Group 2 included 65 ultrasound reports created after process implementation. Each chart was reviewed by a physician and a sonographer. Findings considered unsupported by stored images by both reviewers were used for analysis, and the proportion of unsupported findings was compared between the two groups. Results are expressed as mean ± standard error. A p value of <.05 was used to determine statistical significance. Results: Univariate analysis of baseline characteristics and potential confounders showed no statistically significant difference between the groups. The mean proportion of unsupported findings in Group 1 was 5.1 ± 0.87, with Group 2 having a significantly lower proportion (2.6 ± 0.62) (p value =.018). Conclusions: Results suggest a significant decrease in the proportion of unsupported findings in ultrasound reports after quality improvement process implementation. Thus, we present a simple yet effective quality improvement process to reduce unsupported ultrasound findings.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85041599600&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85041599600&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/14767058.2018.1432587

DO - 10.1080/14767058.2018.1432587

M3 - Article

VL - 32

SP - 2328

EP - 2331

JO - Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine

JF - Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine

SN - 1476-7058

IS - 14

ER -