Criteria for Assessing the Effectiveness of Tomographic Examinations, Indications for Remote Consultation

Abstract

What is the criteria for qualitatively and quantitatively assessment of radiologist work? The aim of this study was to develop criteria for evaluation the effectiveness of the intellectual, analytical work of radiologist, to create objective conditions used in the analysis of diagnostic data - the second opinion (external, remote consultation). Materials and methods. The authors identify three types of diagnostic errors: 1. Inaccuracies in the description due to negligence, lack edits of text. 2. Incomplete description of the examination, not marked comorbidities requiring no emergency, urgent interventions. 3. Incomplete description of the underlying disease, entailed inadequately designated physician treatment. 4. Errors due to misinterpretation of the data - pseudo diagnostics. 5. Errors related to the non-implementation or incomplete survey required the patient for the correct diagnosis. Results. The second level of the third type of errors occurred in 4 of the 335 cases, the third level of error was in 1 case. Pseudo-diagnosis (4th level error) was also in 1 case. Conclusion. The selection of the fourth and fifth levels of diagnostic errors of the third type allows not only to expand the scope of quality control (use a second opinion), but objectify the feasibility of the development of distance learning system based on an objective analysis of efficacy of each radiologist and the team as a whole and highlight various areas remote training.