Factors Affecting Adherence to Outpatient Radiology Report Recommendations

To identify factors associated with adherence to radiology follow-up recommendations by the referring physicians.

In this retrospective study, CT, ultrasound, and MRI reports with the keyword "recommend" and synonyms between March 11, 2019, and March 29, 2019, were included. Emergency department and inpatient examinations and routine surveillance recommendations, such as lung nodules, were excluded. Performance of follow-up examinations was correlated with the strength of recommendation, conditionality of recommendation, direct communication of results to ordering provider, and history of cancer. Outcomes included adherence to recommendations and time to follow-up. Statistical comparison between groups was performed using χ², Kruskal-Wallis, and Spearman correlation.

Qualifying recommendations were provided in 255 reports (age 60.1 ± 16.5 years, female: 151 of 255, 59.22%). Imaging follow-up was performed in 166 of 255 (65%) reports: 148 of 166 (89.15%) nonconditional versus 18 of 166 (10.48%) conditional recommendations (P = .008), and more frequently in the patients with a strong follow-up recommendation (138 of 166 [83.13%], versus 28 of 166 [16.86%]) (P = .009). The median time to follow-up was 28 days versus 82 days in patients without versus with a history of cancer (P = .00057), 28 days versus 70 days with direct communication with the provider versus without (P = .0069), 82.5 versus 21 days for reports in which a specific follow-up interval was provided (86 of 255, 33.72%) versus those without (169 of 255, 66.27%) (P < .001).

The adherence rate for radiological nonroutine recommendations was 65%. Reports with strongly worded and nonconditional follow-up recommendations were followed more frequently. Direct communication with providers, patients without a known cancer history, and recommendations with no specified time interval identified were followed up earlier.

Strongly worded and nonconditional follow-up recommendations increase the likelihood of follow-up being performed. Direct communication of imaging follow-up recommendations to the provider and lack of specific time intervals decreases the median time to follow-up, which in turn may decrease the delay in medical care.