Structured reporting of dental panoramic images in a hospital-based radiology setting: a comparative study

Despite radiological advancements, free-text reporting remains common. Structured reporting (SR) improves completeness, clarity, communication, efficiency, and information extraction while benefiting education and research. Its success depends on well-designed, modality-specific templates.

This study aimed to compare SRs and narrative reports (NRs) for dental panoramic images in a hospital-based radiology department with respect to completeness, clarity, ease of information extraction, and clinical utility.Fifty dental panoramic images were randomly selected from the clinical archive of a tertiary-care hospital radiology department. NRs by radiologists were compared with SRs retrospectively created by a board-certified dentist using a decision-tree template (Smart Radiology platform). A questionnaire, developed with two additional dentists, assessed completeness, clarity, ease of information extraction, and clinical utility.

SRs outperformed NRs in all areas. Clinical questions were answered in 100% of SRs vs. 42% of NRs (p < 0.05). SRs enabled clinical decision-making in 100% of cases vs. 29% for NRs (p < 0.05). Key features were omitted in 3% of SRs but in 96% of NRs (p < 0.05). Information extraction was rated "easy/fast" in 100% of SRs vs. 52% of NRs (p < 0.05). Evaluators showed greater trust in SRs (Likert score: 5.97 vs. 4.27, p < 0.05).

SR significantly enhances report quality, clinical decision-making, and communication in dental panoramic imaging.