Statistics from the American College of Radiology study,“Traditional Text-Only Versus Multimedia-Enhanced Radiology Reporting: Referring Physicians’ Perceptions of Value," explains how valuable referring physicians believe multimedia radiology report to be.

1. CONSIDER...technology that contains the following capabilities,
which can mitigate the need for added steps
for the radiologist
MULTIMEDIA-
ENHANCED
RADIOLOGY
REPORTING
PROCEDURE: CT Abdomen with contrast
CLINICAL INDICATION: Liver metastases (unknown primary tumor).
TECHNIQUE: CT scan of the abdomen with and without contrast was performed ont he volumetric 64 slice
CT scanner. The patient was scanned following the uncomplicated intravenous administration of 100 cc of
Omnipaque 300. 3-D coronal reformatted images were obtained from the axial source images.
COMPARISON: None
FINDINGS:
The lung bases are clear. The heart size is normal, without pericardial thickening or effusion.
There are several hypodense lesions on both lobes of the liver the largest with a diameter of 54.00 mm that
represent liver metastasis from unknown origin most probably.
The spleen is normal in size and homogeneous in density. The stomach is partially collapsed, but is grossly
unremarkable. The pancreas as visualized is normal. The gallbladder and biliary tree are unremarkable and
there is no evidence for biliary dilatation. The adrenal glands are symmetric and normal.
The kidneys are symmetrically unremarkable as well. The collecting system on the right is enlarged.
The aorta is of normal caliber. Aortic calcifications are present. There is no retroperitoneal
lymphadenopathy. The porta hepatis region is clear. The bowel and mesentery, as visualized, are equally
unremarkable.
S/P total left hip replacement.
The surrounding osseous structures are remarkable for mild degenerative spondylosis of the spine. Mild
scoliosis of the lumbar spine No osteolytic or osteoblastic lesion is detected.
IMPRESSION:
1. Several liver metastasis on both lobes from unknown origin.
2. S/P total left hip replacement
Name: KING KEVIN ID: 201222091934
Accession No.: 9275000235689 Report Date: 23/12/2005
Referring Physician: David Evans, MD 713-213-5479 davide@practice.com
Report Information
Midland Imaging
PROCEDURE: CT Chest.
CLINICAL INDICATION: Known left-sided squamous cell carcinoma of the lung post surgery with suspected
lung metastsis
TECHNIQUE: CT scan of the chest without contrast was performed on the GE volumetric 64 slice CT scanner.
3-D coronal reformatted images were obtained from the axial source images.
COMPARISON: CT March 31 2012, CT June 23 2012
Name: DAVIS DOROTHY ID: 201201061940
Accession No.: 9275000234567 Report Date: 28/09/2012
Referring Physician: David Evans, MD 713-213-5479 davide@practice.com
Report Information
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
F05 F04 F07
Volume
31/03/2012
Baseline
28/09/2012
Followup
07/08/2012
Date
23/06/2012
Followup
Target Lesions
Name Target Description SeriesImageLong Diameter (mm)Short Diameter (mm)Volume (mm3)SUV Max (BW)
B06 (F04) Target Lesion (Lung) 3 99 13 5.4 407.8 --
B08 (F07) Target Lesion (Lung) 3 63 12.8 8.3 437.9 --
B07 (F05) Target Lesion (Lung) 3 71 7.9 5.7 228.1 --
Sum of target lesions (3): 33.7mm (Long)
The automatic segmented lesions may not have been approved or adjusted
Change Over Time
Name Target Baseline
2012-03-31
2012-06-23 2012-09-28 (Current)
F05 Target Volume (mm3)
Long (mm)
Short (mm)
109.4 (--)
7.1 (--)
3.5 (--)
165.4 (+51.2%)
7.3 (+4%)
5.1 (+43.9%)
140
228.1 (+108.5%)
7.9 (+12.2%)
5.7 (+62.6%)
170
Midland Imaging
2005-12-23, CT Abdomen
Study Information
Name Target Description Series Image Long Diameter (mm) Short Diameter (mm) Volume (mm3) SUV Max (BW)
Other Lesions
Signed By
John Jennings, MD
B01 Lesion (Liver) 5861 72 34.8 25.4 8888.7 --
B02 Lesion (Liver) 5861 67 54 44.7 49936.2 --
The automatic segmented lesions may not have been approved or adjusted.
THE VALUE OF
MULTIMEDIA-
ENHANCED
RADIOLOGY
REPORTING
THE VALUE OF
MERRPROVIDES GREATER
VALUE TO RADIOLOGISTS
MERRFACILITIES
67%believe that using interactive MERR,
they would be more likely to review both
report text and images with patients.
Midland Imaging
Name:
Patient ID:
History:
Date of Birth:
Study CT chest with contrast
Facility:
Physician: XXXXX XXXXXX, MD
Date of Service: XX/XX/XXXX XX:XX:XX
PROCEDURE: CT chest with contrast
REASON FOR EXAM: Female, 59 years old. Congestion and a left upper lobe infiltrate.
RADIATION DOSAGE: (if Supplied by Facility): CTDlvol=(30.34) mGy, DLP=(523.87) mGycm.
TECHNIQUE: High resolution transaxial imaging was preformed following intravenous administration of 100ml of
Isovue 300 contrast material. Multi planar coronal and sagittal images were reformatted.
COMPARISON: Prior CT scan 02/20/13 and radiographs 02/26/13
believe that using MERR, they would be more likely
to provide patients access to both text reports and images.
66%
80%
believed that MERR
would represent
an improvement
85%
expressed interest in
having access to
diagnostic images for
radiology reports that
currently do not
include images
AND HERE’S THE FINAL REPORT
For more information, visit carestream.com/vue-reporting
80%
believed that MERR
would represent
an improvement
Improved
understanding of
radiology findings by
correlating images to
text reports.
Time saved trying to
understand findings without
supporting imaging.
Easier access
to images while
monitoring progression
of a disease/condition.
Easier access to
images while planning
treatment.
C O N C L U S I O N :
MERRPROVIDES GREATER
VALUE TO RADIOLOGISTS
C O N C L U S I O N :
SOURCES:
Gelareh Sadigh, MD, Timothy Hertweck, BA, Cristine Kao, BSc, Paul Wood, BA,
Danny Hughes, PhD, Travis S. Henry, MD, Richard Duszak Jr, MD,
“Traditional Text-Only Versus Multimedia-Enhanced Radiology Reporting:
Referring Physicians’ Perceptions of Value,” Journal of American College of Radiology,
January 23, 2015.
jacr.org/article/S1546-1440(14)00737-6/abstract
79%
of physicians are more
likely to recommend that
their peers refer patients
to a facility with
multimedia reporting
80%
of physicians
would preferentially
refer patients to a facility
with multimedia reporting
COMMONLY REPORTED
ADVANTAGES OF MERR
80%
of physicians
would preferentially
refer patients to a facility
with multimedia reporting
79%
of physicians are more
likely to recommend that
their peers refer patients
to a facility with
multimedia reporting
85%
expressed interest in
having access to
diagnostic images for
radiology reports that
currently do not
include images
Participants,
on average,
reported
providing
patients with
copies of
text reports
of the time.
50%
66%
50%
86%
79%
66%
64%
MERR IS NOT WITHOUT ITS CONCERNS
Compared with text-only reports, most physicians (57%)
reported that MERR would be of more value for studies
with significant positive findings.
More than half of physicians (53%) reported that MERR
would be more valuable than text-only reports for conditions
that require follow-up and monitoring of the progression
of a disease over a period of time.
28% of physicians said they had concerns about
MERR implementation
MULTIMEDIA-ENHANCED
RADIOLOGY REPORTING (MERR)
providing advantages to radiologists
across specialties
MULTIMEDIA-ENHANCED
RADIOLOGY REPORTING (MERR)
providing advantages to radiologists
across specialties
Clinic workflow does not allow
viewing reports in such a fashion.
42%
Too time intensive.
53%
Automatically include
key images into report
Automatically include
hyperlinks to key diagnoses
or anatomical markers
Take key measurements
and automatically present
comparisons and
highlight major changes