PMID- 24070505
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20140425
LR  - 20151119
IS  - 1535-7732 (Electronic)
IS  - 1051-0443 (Linking)
VI  - 24
IP  - 10
DP  - 2013 Oct
TI  - Interventional radiology peer, a newly developed peer-review scoring system 
      designed for interventional radiology practice.
PG  - 1481-6.e1
LID - S1051-0443(13)01185-8 [pii]
LID - 10.1016/j.jvir.2013.07.001 [doi]
AB  - PURPOSE: Existing diagnostic radiology peer-review systems do not address the 
      specificities of interventional radiology (IR) practice. The purpose of this 
      study was to assess the feasibility of a specifically developed interventional 
      peer review method, IR Peer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective review of a 
      prospectively encoded pilot database aimed at demonstrating the feasibility of IR 
      Peer in a multiphysician practice was performed. This scoring system used morning 
      peer review of selected IR cases from the previous day in the form of a five-item 
      questionnaire and an ordinal answer scale that grades reviewers' agreement with 
      imaging findings, procedural/technical management, early outcomes, and follow-up 
      plan. Patient lists from IR Peer and morbidity and mortality (M&M) conferences 
      were compared to evaluate the amount of overlap and capability of IR Peer to help 
      detect adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: A total of 417 consecutive reviews of IR 
      attending physician cases by peers were performed in 163 consecutive patients 
      over 18 months, and 94% of cases were reviewed by two or three IR attending 
      physicians. Each question was answered 99%-100% of the time. Answers showed 
      disagreement in 10% of cases (2% by a single reviewer, 8% by several), most 
      related to procedural technique. Overall AE incidence was 1.8%. IR Peer 
      contributed 10.7% of cases to the M&M list. CONCLUSIONS: IR Peer is feasible, 
      relevant, and easy to implement in a multiphysician IR practice. When used along 
      with other quality-assurance processes, it might help in the detection of AEs for 
      M&M; the latter will require further confirmatory research.
CI  - (c) SIR, 2013.
FAU - d'Othee, Bertrand Janne
AU  - d'Othee BJ
AD  - Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Division of Vascular and 
      Interventional Radiology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, 22 S. Greene 
      St. (N2W74), Baltimore, MD 21201.
FAU - Haskal, Ziv J
AU  - Haskal ZJ
LA  - eng
PT  - Journal Article
PL  - United States
TA  - J Vasc Interv Radiol
JT  - Journal of vascular and interventional radiology : JVIR
JID - 9203369
SB  - IM
MH  - Employee Performance Appraisal/*methods/standards/*statistics & numerical data
MH  - Observer Variation
MH  - Peer Review, Health Care/*methods
MH  - Professional Competence/standards/*statistics & numerical data
MH  - Quality Assurance, Health Care/*methods/standards
MH  - Radiology, Interventional/standards/*statistics & numerical data
MH  - *Surveys and Questionnaires
MH  - United States
OTO - NOTNLM
OT  - AE
OT  - IR
OT  - M&M
OT  - adverse event
OT  - interventional radiology
OT  - morbidity and mortality
EDAT- 2013/09/28 06:00
MHDA- 2014/04/26 06:00
CRDT- 2013/09/28 06:00
PHST- 2012/12/17 00:00 [received]
PHST- 2013/06/21 00:00 [revised]
PHST- 2013/07/01 00:00 [accepted]
PHST- 2013/09/28 06:00 [entrez]
PHST- 2013/09/28 06:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2014/04/26 06:00 [medline]
AID - S1051-0443(13)01185-8 [pii]
AID - 10.1016/j.jvir.2013.07.001 [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2013 Oct;24(10):1481-6.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2013.07.001.