MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.7759/cureus.99549

Медицинская библиотека · Cureus · 2025

Enhancing Radiology Request Form Completeness With a Standardized Tool and Targeted Education: A Two-Cycle Clinical Audit.

Shaddad Mohaira Ishag Yagoob, Eisa Manhal Eisa Galal, Abdalla Esra, Mohamed Ahmed Nabil Mahmoud, Elshikh Shimaa T, Alfaki Ayat, Mohamed Ahmed Mohamedosman Abdalla, Mohamed Zainab, Mohammed Einas Mohammed Ibrahim, Baleela Sulafa A H, Mohamed-Sharif Mohamed, Ahmed Lina, Kheiralla Ahmed Hisham Mohammedosman, ElKhalifa Badawi ElAmin Ahmed, Eltahir Riem, Mohammed Mazin Elyas Alawad, Hussein Mohamed Saifeldin Sharif, Mohamed Ahmed Mohamed Almustafa Magdi M, Tahameed Tasneem Sulieman M, Mohammed Hamed Faris Jamalaldeen

СтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Incomplete radiology request forms (RRFs) hinder diagnostic accuracy, delay patient management, and increase the risk of unnecessary imaging. This issue is particularly relevant in resource-limited healthcare settings where RRFs represent the primary communication tool between clinicians and radiology departments.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the completeness of RRF documentation at Bashair University Hospital and assess the impact of implementing a standardized form supported by targeted clinician education.

METHODS

A prospective closed-loop clinical audit was conducted over two cycles, with 50 RRFs reviewed in each phase. Cycle 1 was performed over two weeks in May 2025, followed by a one-month intervention that introduced a structured Royal College of Radiologists (RCR)-compliant request form and delivered educational sessions. Cycle 2 was conducted over a subsequent three-month period. Data were extracted using a predefined checklist and analyzed using descriptive statistics and chi-square testing.

RESULTS

Baseline documentation was markedly deficient across several critical parameters, including patient address 0 (0.0%), urgency 0 (0.0%), clinical background 8 (16.0%), and the stated clinical question 3 (6.0%). Following the intervention, statistically significant improvements were observed in address documentation 47 (94.0%), p < 0.0001; urgency 47 (94.0%), p < 0.0001; clinical background 42 (84.0%), p < 0.0001; and diagnostic question 41 (82.0%), p < 0.0001. Recording the referring clinician's name also improved substantially from 9 (18.0%) to 47 (94.0%) (p < 0.0001). The patient's name was consistently documented at 50 (100.0%) in both cycles. Conversely, telephone contact information remained poorly documented (1, 2.0%, p = 1.000), and documentation of the requested imaging modality showed no statistically significant improvement (p = 0.5579).

CONCLUSION

The implementation of a standardized RRF and focused educational intervention substantially improved documentation quality and compliance with RCR standards. These findings demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of low-cost interventions in optimizing communication, enhancing diagnostic safety, and reducing unnecessary imaging. Continued monitoring, reinforcement of contact information fields, and periodic re-audits are recommended to sustain improvements.

Для цитирования: Shaddad Mohaira Ishag Yagoob, Eisa Manhal Eisa Galal, Abdalla Esra, Mohamed Ahmed Nabil Mahmoud, Elshikh Shimaa T, Alfaki Ayat, Mohamed Ahmed Mohamedosman Abdalla, Mohamed Zainab, Mohammed Einas Mohammed Ibrahim, Baleela Sulafa A H, Mohamed-Sharif Mohamed, Ahmed Lina, Kheiralla Ahmed Hisham Mohammedosman, ElKhalifa Badawi ElAmin Ahmed, Eltahir Riem, Mohammed Mazin Elyas Alawad, Hussein Mohamed Saifeldin Sharif, Mohamed Ahmed Mohamed Almustafa Magdi M, Tahameed Tasneem Sulieman M, Mohammed Hamed Faris Jamalaldeen. Enhancing Radiology Request Form Completeness With a Standardized Tool and Targeted Education: A Two-Cycle Clinical Audit.. Cureus. 2025. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.99549.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.