World Rural Health Conference
Home Print this page Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font size
Users Online: 726
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
RESEARCH AND AUDIT
Year : 2015  |  Volume : 4  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 328-330

An audit of the completion of radiology request forms and the request practice


Department of Radiology, University of Calabar Teaching Hospital, Calabar, Cross River State, Nigeria

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Akintunde O Akintomide
Department of Radiology, University of Calabar Teaching Hospital, Calabar, Cross River State
Nigeria
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2249-4863.161308

Rights and Permissions

Objective: To assess the degree of utilization of the radiology request form (RRF), the extent of completion each form, the frequency of filling the fields in all the forms, and its effectiveness as a communication tool between the referring clinicians and radiologists. Materials and Methods: All the RRFs for conventional radiographic examinations were audited over a 3-month period. A database containing all the fields in the form, type of request paper used, and legibility of the physician's handwriting was created. A few resident radiologists in the plain film reporting unit were recruited to join in collecting the data daily. We used simple statistical methods to analyze the extent of completion of each form, frequency of completion of the fields in all the request forms, frequency of use of the appropriate form, and frequency of legibility of the physician's handwriting. The results are expressed in percentages. Results: Five hundred eighty (580) requests were analyzed, consisting of 180 for males and 400 for females. The most-completed request form was 86.67% filled, while the least-completed was 26.67%. The most frequently filled field was the requested examination (99.66%). Of the clinicians, 28% did not use the RRF for their referrals, while 7.37% had illegible handwriting. Conclusion: A significant number of the referring clinicians did not make the best use of the radiology department by not using the institution's approved RRF as an effective means of communication with the radiologists, mainly due to the inadequate completion of the forms.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1860    
    Printed22    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded252    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal