Impact of structured reporting on developing head and neck ultrasound skills

Reports of head and neck ultrasound examinations are frequently written by hand as free texts. This is a serious obstacle to the learning process of the modality due to a missing report structure and terminology. Therefore, there is a great inter-observer variability in overall report quality. Aim o...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BMC medical education 2019-04, Vol.19 (1), p.102-102, Article 102
Hauptverfasser: Ernst, Benjamin P, Katzer, Fabian, Künzel, Julian, Hodeib, Mohamed, Strieth, Sebastian, Eckrich, Jonas, Tattermusch, Anna, Froelich, Matthias F, Matthias, Christoph, Sommer, Wieland H, Becker, Sven
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Reports of head and neck ultrasound examinations are frequently written by hand as free texts. This is a serious obstacle to the learning process of the modality due to a missing report structure and terminology. Therefore, there is a great inter-observer variability in overall report quality. Aim of the present study was to evaluate the impact of structured reporting on the learning process as indicated by the overall report quality of head and neck ultrasound examinations within medical school education. Following an immersion course on head and neck ultrasound, previously documented images of three common pathologies were handed out to 58 medical students who asked to create both standard free text reports (FTR) and structured reports (SR). A template for structured reporting of head and neck ultrasound examinations was created using a web-based approach. FTRs and SRs were evaluated with regard to overall quality, completeness, required time to completion and readability by two independent raters (Paired Wilcoxon test, 95% CI). Ratings were assessed for inter-rater reliability (Fleiss' kappa). Additionally, a questionnaire was utilized to evaluate user satisfaction. SRs received significantly better ratings in terms of report completeness (97.7% vs. 53.5%, p 
ISSN:1472-6920
1472-6920
DOI:10.1186/s12909-019-1538-6