Time Spent by Radiologists Calling Clinicians for Protocol Clarification
Direct Answer
No specific published study directly measuring the time radiologists spend calling other clinicians to clarify clinical information for protocoling radiology examinations was identified in the available evidence. However, the literature acknowledges this communication burden exists and emphasizes its importance for quality and safety.
What the Evidence Shows
Communication Requirements Are Recognized But Not Quantified
The available evidence discusses radiologist-clinician communication extensively but focuses on post-interpretation communication rather than pre-acquisition protocoling communication:
The ACR White Paper on Teleradiology Practice emphasizes that radiologists should be engaged in "supervision of the protocoling of studies and patient preparation" and that "pathways of easy and prompt communication should be well established" between radiologists and referring providers 1.
Communication between radiologists and technologists is highlighted as "critical to ensuring overall quality and patient safety" for three needs: quality control, transmission of relevant patient information, and addressing queries regarding study appropriateness 1.
The lack of adequate clinical information is recognized as a problem that "may negatively affect the teleradiologist's ability to determine whether a finding is important" 1.
Related Time Measurement Studies Exist
While no study specifically measures protocoling communication time, one study did measure reporting times:
A 2013 study from New Zealand measured radiologist reporting times using automated data from a Radiology Information System, analyzing over 179,000 reports to establish median reporting times for various examinations 2.
A 1990 study compared measured versus perceived time for radiologic work, finding a 48.6% mean difference between actual measured times and radiologists' perceived times 3.
Neither of these studies addressed the specific question of time spent on pre-examination clinical clarification calls.
The Communication Gap Is Acknowledged
The evidence reveals that inadequate clinical information is a recognized workflow problem:
Decision support systems are discussed as potentially reducing unnecessary imaging by approximately 15%, partly by ensuring appropriate test selection 1.
The absence of complete clinical information "creates inefficiencies in the diagnosis and treatment" and "can lead to waste and errors" 1.
Clinical Implications
Why This Matters
The lack of quantitative data on protocoling communication time represents a knowledge gap in understanding radiologist workflow and productivity:
Time spent clarifying clinical information directly impacts radiologist efficiency and departmental throughput.
This unmeasured work may contribute to reporting backlogs, which a 2024 global survey found present in 68% of facilities 4.
Inadequate protocoling due to insufficient clinical information can lead to suboptimal examinations requiring repeat imaging.
Common Pitfalls
Assuming all radiologist time is captured in reporting metrics: Current productivity measures typically only account for interpretation time, not pre-examination communication 2, 3.
Underestimating the communication burden: The ACR emphasizes that communication must be "timely" and that "failure to implement a responsive communications system" can lead to adverse events 1.
Research Need
This represents an important area for future investigation, as understanding the time burden of protocoling communication could:
- Inform staffing models and workflow optimization
- Support the business case for improved clinical decision support systems
- Quantify the value of complete clinical information at the time of order entry
The methodology used in the 2013 New Zealand study measuring reporting times through automated RIS data 2 could potentially be adapted to capture protocoling communication time if systems were designed to track this activity.