Teleradiology in Saudi Arabia: a national survey and retrospective review of associated MRI reports.
Digital communication
Healthcare delivery
Neuroimaging
Quality assurance
Teleradiology
Journal
BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
31 Oct 2024
31 Oct 2024
Historique:
received:
30
05
2024
accepted:
03
10
2024
medline:
1
11
2024
pubmed:
1
11
2024
entrez:
1
11
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Due to the recent evolution of telecommunications, it is now acknowledged that digital communication provides essential services for remote areas. Teleradiology allows the ability to obtain images at one site, send them over a distance, and view them remotely for diagnostic or consultation purposes. The highlighted objectives include (a) the added value of the service, (b) user satisfaction, and (c) quality assurance according to global best practices and national quality standards. This study utilised an eight-part online self-report survey distributed among employees of the Ministry of Health (MOH) who use the national teleradiology platform. The survey sections were designed to gather comprehensive data, including participant demographics, levels of satisfaction with the service, awareness of security measures, communication effectiveness, perceived advantages and disadvantages, quality assurance, technical challenges, IT support, and future perceptions of teleradiology services. Additionally, a total of 212 MRI reports from patients who underwent brain and spine MRI examinations between 2018 and 2020 were collected from the platform to strengthen the analysis. Most survey respondents (78%) were males, with a significant majority (96.2%) affirming that teleradiology sufficiently addresses clinical inquiries. Furthermore, 90% expressed satisfaction with the service, and 93% endorsed the standardization of MR imaging procedures across Ministry of Health (MOH) hospitals. Notably, 92.4% recognised teleradiology as a transformative strategy for healthcare facilities in Saudi Arabia, concurring with its benefits. The analysis of the MRI reports revealed structural inconsistencies; compared with structured templates, the average number of incorporated elements was reduced, and essential elements were frequently absent. Intriguingly, reports delineating normal cases included a higher incidence of clinical impressions relative to those describing abnormalities, yet the latter contained a more comprehensive array of elements. Variability in report composition was correlated with the years of experience of the reporters. Teleradiology users perceived enhancements in the quality of radiological reporting and the daily operational workflow. Nonetheless, certain limitations were identified, necessitating focused improvements by service providers. Despite teleradiology being a subspecialisation, it can reduce the role of local radiologists. Further research is needed on data security, confidentiality, and archiving options, as well as the cost-effectiveness of teleradiology services.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Due to the recent evolution of telecommunications, it is now acknowledged that digital communication provides essential services for remote areas. Teleradiology allows the ability to obtain images at one site, send them over a distance, and view them remotely for diagnostic or consultation purposes.
AIM
OBJECTIVE
The highlighted objectives include (a) the added value of the service, (b) user satisfaction, and (c) quality assurance according to global best practices and national quality standards.
METHODS
METHODS
This study utilised an eight-part online self-report survey distributed among employees of the Ministry of Health (MOH) who use the national teleradiology platform. The survey sections were designed to gather comprehensive data, including participant demographics, levels of satisfaction with the service, awareness of security measures, communication effectiveness, perceived advantages and disadvantages, quality assurance, technical challenges, IT support, and future perceptions of teleradiology services. Additionally, a total of 212 MRI reports from patients who underwent brain and spine MRI examinations between 2018 and 2020 were collected from the platform to strengthen the analysis.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Most survey respondents (78%) were males, with a significant majority (96.2%) affirming that teleradiology sufficiently addresses clinical inquiries. Furthermore, 90% expressed satisfaction with the service, and 93% endorsed the standardization of MR imaging procedures across Ministry of Health (MOH) hospitals. Notably, 92.4% recognised teleradiology as a transformative strategy for healthcare facilities in Saudi Arabia, concurring with its benefits. The analysis of the MRI reports revealed structural inconsistencies; compared with structured templates, the average number of incorporated elements was reduced, and essential elements were frequently absent. Intriguingly, reports delineating normal cases included a higher incidence of clinical impressions relative to those describing abnormalities, yet the latter contained a more comprehensive array of elements. Variability in report composition was correlated with the years of experience of the reporters. Teleradiology users perceived enhancements in the quality of radiological reporting and the daily operational workflow. Nonetheless, certain limitations were identified, necessitating focused improvements by service providers.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Despite teleradiology being a subspecialisation, it can reduce the role of local radiologists. Further research is needed on data security, confidentiality, and archiving options, as well as the cost-effectiveness of teleradiology services.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39482669
doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-11706-5
pii: 10.1186/s12913-024-11706-5
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1327Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Coppola F, Bibbolino C, Grassi R, Pierotti L, Silverio R, Lassandro F, Neri E, Regge D. Results of an Italian survey on teleradiology. Radiol Med. 2016;121(8):652–9.
pubmed: 27108418
doi: 10.1007/s11547-016-0640-7
Shem S, Ugwu A, Hamidu A, Flavious N, Ibrahim M, Zira D. Challenges, opportunities and strategies of global health radiology in low and middle-income countries (LMICs): an excerpt review. J Cancer Prev Curr Res. 2022;13(1):14–20.
doi: 10.15406/jcpcr.2022.13.00480
Burute N, Jankharia B. Teleradiology: the Indian perspective. Indian J Radiol Imaging. 2009;19(01):16–8.
pubmed: 19774131
doi: 10.4103/0971-3026.45337
Teleradiology and technology innovations in radiology: status in India and its role in increasing access to primary health care. The Lancet Regional Health - Southeast Asia 2024, 23.
Maher A, Bahadori M, Davarpanah M, Ravangard R. Factors affecting the establishment of teleradiology services: a case study of Iran. Shiraz E Med J. 2019;20(1):e69184.
Rosenkrantz AB, Hanna TN, Steenburg SD, Tarrant MJ, Pyatt RS, Friedberg EB. The current state of Teleradiology across the United States: A National Survey of radiologists’ habits, attitudes, and perceptions on Teleradiology Practice. J Am Coll Radiol. 2019;16(12):1677–87.
pubmed: 31271736
doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2019.05.053
Dixon AK, FitzGerald R. Outsourcing and teleradiology: potential benefits, risks and solutions from a UK/European Perspective. J Am Coll Radiol. 2008;5(1):12–8.
pubmed: 18180002
doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2007.09.010
Ashcroft RE, Goddard PR. Ethical issues in teleradiology. Br J Radiol. 2000;73(870):578–82.
pubmed: 10911778
doi: 10.1259/bjr.73.870.10911778
Jacobs JJWM, Ekkelboom R, Jacobs JPAM, van der Molen T, Sanderman R. Patient satisfaction with a teleradiology service in general practice. BMC Fam Pract. 2016;17(1):17.
pubmed: 26864118
doi: 10.1186/s12875-016-0418-y
European Society of R. ESR teleradiology survey: results. Insights into Imaging. 2016;7(4):463–79.
doi: 10.1007/s13244-016-0485-6
Saliba V, Legido-Quigley H, Hallik R, Aaviksoo A, Car J, McKee M. Telemedicine across borders: a systematic review of factors that hinder or support implementation. Int J Med Informatics. 2012;81(12):793–809.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2012.08.003
RadReport. Template library [ https://radreport.org ].
Al-Dahery ST, Alsharif WM, Alamri FH, Nawawi SA, Mofti WK, Alhazmi FH, Alshamrani KM, Suliman AG, Qurashi AA. The role of teleradiology during COVID-19 outbreak: Saudi radiologists’ perspectives. Saudi Med J. 2023;44(2):202.
pubmed: 36773982
doi: 10.15537/smj.2023.44.2.20220793
Ain HQU, Tahir MJ, Waheed S, Ahmad S, Ullah I, Yousaf Z. Teleradiology in COVID-19: a sustainable innovative solution. Acad Radiol. 2021;28(9):1325–6.
pubmed: 34312060
doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2021.06.020
Boufarasse YB, Ettahir A, Bekkali D, Bennani J. Teleradiology and AI as solution to overcome the COVID-19 pandemic impact during the lockdowns in Africa. Health Sci J. 2020;14(7):1–2.
Thrall JH. Teleradiology Part II. Limitations, risks, and opportunities. Radiology. 2007;244(2):325–8.
pubmed: 17641358
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2442070676
Qamar SR, Khurshid K, Jalal S, McInnes MDF, Probyn L, Finlay K, Hague CJ, Hibbert RM, Joshi M, Rybicki FJ, et al. Gender Disparity among Leaders of Canadian Academic Radiology Departments. Am J Roentgenol. 2019;214(1):3–9.
doi: 10.2214/AJR.18.20992
Zener R, Lee SY, Visscher KL, Ricketts M, Speer S, Wiseman D. Women in Radiology: exploring the gender disparity. J Am Coll Radiol. 2016;13(3):344–e350341.
pubmed: 26774885
doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2015.10.019
Ahmadi M, Khurshid K, Sanelli PC, Jalal S, Chahal T, Norbash A, Nicolaou S, Castillo M, Khosa F. Influences for gender disparity in academic neuroradiology. Am J Neuroradiol. 2018;39(1):18.
pubmed: 29191872
doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A5443
Agrawal P, Madsen TE, Lall M, Zeidan A. Gender disparities in academic Emergency Medicine: strategies for the recruitment, Retention, and Promotion of women. AEM Educ Train. 2020;4(S1):S67–74.
pubmed: 32072109
doi: 10.1002/aet2.10414
Roubidoux MA, Packer MM, Applegate KE, Aben G. Female Medical Students’ interest in Radiology Careers. J Am Coll Radiol. 2009;6(4):246–53.
pubmed: 19327657
doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2008.11.014
Weigel KS, Kubik-Huch RA, Gebhard C. Women in radiology: why is the pipeline still leaking and how can we plug it? Acta Radiol. 2020;61(6):743–8.
pubmed: 31648538
doi: 10.1177/0284185119881723
Spalluto LB, Arleo EK, Lewis MC, Oates ME, Macura KJ. Addressing needs of women radiologists: opportunities for Practice leaders to facilitate change. Radiographics. 2018;38(6):1626–37.
pubmed: 30303802
doi: 10.1148/rg.2018180023
Goelz L, Arndt H, Hausmann J, Madeja C, Mutze S. Obstacles and solutions driving the development of a National Teleradiology Network. Healthcare. 2021;9(12):1684.
pubmed: 34946410
doi: 10.3390/healthcare9121684
Kaufmann TJ, Smits M, Boxerman J, Huang R, Barboriak DP, Weller M, Chung C, Tsien C, Brown PD, Shankar L, et al. Consensus recommendations for a standardized brain tumor imaging protocol for clinical trials in brain metastases. Neurooncology. 2020;22(6):757–72.
Eberhardt SC, Heilbrun ME. Radiology Report Value Equation. RadioGraphics. 2018;38(6):1888–96.
pubmed: 30303791
doi: 10.1148/rg.2018180133
Sachs PB, Hunt K, Mansoubi F, Borgstede J. CT and MR Protocol standardization across a large Health System: providing a consistent radiologist, patient, and referring provider experience. J Digit Imaging. 2017;30(1):11–6.
pubmed: 27448401
doi: 10.1007/s10278-016-9895-8
Glazer DI, DiPiro PJ, Shinagare AB, Huang RY, Wang A, Boland GW, Khorasani R. CT and MRI protocol variation and optimization at an Academic Medical Center. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018;15(9):1254–8.
pubmed: 30082232
doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2018.06.002
Sharma PS, Saindane AM. Standardizing magnetic resonance imaging protocols across a large Radiology Enterprise: barriers and solutions. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2020;49(5):312–6.
pubmed: 32173157
doi: 10.1067/j.cpradiol.2020.01.012
Carter SM, Rogers W, Win KT, Frazer H, Richards B, Houssami N. The ethical, legal and social implications of using artificial intelligence systems in breast cancer care. Breast. 2020;49:25–32.
pubmed: 31677530
doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2019.10.001
Engelmann U, Schröter A, Borälv E, Schweitzer T, Meinzer H-P. Mobile teleradiology: all images everywhere. Int Congr Ser. 2001;1230:844–50.
doi: 10.1016/S0531-5131(01)00143-1
Drnasin I, Gogic G, Tonkovic S. Interactive teleradiology. World Congress on Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, September 7–12, 2009, Munich, Germany: 2009// 2009; Berlin. Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2009. pp. 290–4.
doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-03904-1_81
Tahir MY, Mars M, Scott RE. A review of teleradiology in Africa–towards mobile teleradiology in Nigeria. SA J Radiol. 2022;26(1):2257.
pubmed: 35169498
Demaerschalk BM, Vargas JE, Channer DD, Noble BN, Kiernan T-EJ, Gleason EA, Vargas BB, Ingall TJ, Aguilar MI, Dodick DW, et al. Smartphone Teleradiology Application is successfully Incorporated into a Telestroke Network Environment. Stroke. 2012;43(11):3098–101.
pubmed: 22968466
doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.669325
Kim DK, Kim EY, Yang KH, Lee CK, Yoo SK. A Mobile Tele-Radiology Imaging System with JPEG2000 for an Emergency Care. J Digit Imaging. 2011;24(4):709–18.
pubmed: 20824300
doi: 10.1007/s10278-010-9335-0
Dalla Palma L, Stacul F, Meduri S, Geitung JT. Relationships between radiologists and clinicians: results from three surveys. Clin Radiol. 2000;55(8):602–5.
pubmed: 10964730
doi: 10.1053/crad.2000.0495
Darras KE, Forster BB, Spouge R, de Bruin ABH, Arnold A, Nicolaou S, Hu J, Hatala R, van Merriënboer J. Virtual dissection with clinical radiology cases provides Educational Value to First Year Medical Students. Acad Radiol. 2020;27(11):1633–40.
pubmed: 31786075
doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2019.09.031
ESR ESoR. ESR white paper on teleradiology: an update from the teleradiology subgroup. Insights into Imaging. 2014;5(1):1–8.
doi: 10.1007/s13244-013-0307-z
Unified Health File [ https://www.moh.gov.sa/en/Ministry/Unified-Health-File/Pages/default.aspx ].
Mitchell JR, Sharma P, Modi J, Simpson M, Thomas M, Hill MD, Goyal M. A smartphone client-server Teleradiology System for primary diagnosis of Acute Stroke. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13(2):e31.
pubmed: 21550961
doi: 10.2196/jmir.1732
Martinon A, Le Pogam MA, Boublay N, Ganne C, Ben Cheikh A, Buron C, Thomson V, Berthezène Y, Journé C. Teleradiology saves times in cases of vital emergencies: a comparative study with on-call radiology in two urban medium-sized French hospitals. Eur Res Telemedicine / La Recherche Européenne en Télémédecine. 2014;3(4):151–60.
doi: 10.1016/j.eurtel.2014.10.001
Barneveld Binkhuysen FH, Ranschaert ER. Teleradiology: evolution and concepts. Eur J Radiol. 2011;78(2):205–9.
pubmed: 20869183
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.08.027
Rackimuthu S, Hasan MM, Ray I, Sahito AM, Chawla P, Ghosh D. Teleradiology in India during the COVID-19 pandemic: merits, pitfalls and future perspectives. Health Policy Plann. 2022;37(9):1203–6.
Donnelly LF, Grzeszczuk R, Guimaraes CV, Zhang W, Bisset Iii GS. Using a Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning Algorithm Program to Analyze Inter-radiologist Report Style Variation and compare variation between Radiologists when using highly structured Versus more free text reporting. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2019;48(6):524–30.
pubmed: 30391224
doi: 10.1067/j.cpradiol.2018.09.005
Donnelly LF, Grzeszczuk R, Guimaraes CV. Use of Natural Language Processing (NLP) in evaluation of Radiology reports: an update on applications and technology advances. Seminars Ultrasound CT MRI. 2022;43(2):176–81.
doi: 10.1053/j.sult.2022.02.007
Saha A, Grimm LJ, Harowicz M, Ghate SV, Kim C, Walsh R, Mazurowski MA. Interobserver variability in identification of breast tumors in MRI and its implications for prognostic biomarkers and radiogenomics. Med Phys. 2016;43(8):4558.
pubmed: 27487872
doi: 10.1118/1.4955435
Quattrocchi CC, Giona A, Di Martino AC, Errante Y, Scarciolla L, Mallio CA, Denaro V, Zobel BB. Extra-spinal incidental findings at lumbar spine MRI in the general population: a large cohort study. Insights into Imaging. 2013;4(3):301–8.
pubmed: 23456750
doi: 10.1007/s13244-013-0234-z
Brady A, Laoide R, McCarthy P, McDermott R. Discrepancy and error in radiology: concepts, causes and consequences. Ulster Med J. 2012;81(1):3–9.
pubmed: 23536732
Karran EL, Medalian Y, Hillier SL, Moseley GL. The impact of choosing words carefully: an online investigation into imaging reporting strategies and best practice care for low back pain. PeerJ. 2017;5:e4151.
pubmed: 29230375
doi: 10.7717/peerj.4151
Alruwaili AR, Jamea AA, Alayed RN, Alebrah AY, Alshowaiman RY, Almugbel LA, Heikal AG, Alkhanbashi AS, Maflahi AA. A critical examination of Academic Hospital practices—paving the way for standardized structured reports in Neuroimaging. J Clin Med. 2024;13(15):4334.
pubmed: 39124601
doi: 10.3390/jcm13154334
Alshamrani K, Alkenawi A. Teleradiology public-private partnerships in Saudi Arabia: a review. Int J Med Developing Ctries. 2021;5:1096–9.
doi: 10.24911/IJMDC.51-1614155864