A B S T R A C T S Vol, 2, No. 12, December 1995

10-1 Due Process Harry J. Griffiths, M.D. University of Minnesota Hospital.

10-2 Improving Report Quality: The Effects of Structured Training for R1 's Niall G. Warnock, FRCR, Wilbur L. Smith, M.D. University of Iowa.

Purpose: to understand and to implement Due Process in order to discipline one of our residents.

Material and Methods: advice was sought from a number of different sources including the hospital lawyer, the Dean's office, the ACR and the AMA.

Results: the resident was disciplined and we now understand the system better. It is essential to document in writing each and every transgression as well as to record every step of the process.

Conclusion: Program directors need to understand "Due Process" which is a complex legal process. A handout will be available for those interested.

Purpose: Report quality is a function of four attributes; accuracy, brevity, clarity and timeliness. Radiological education generally prioritises the first of these. By emphasising all aspects of report quality during training, we anticipate that brevity, clarity and timeliness can be improved without loss of accuracy.

Methods: The 1994 introductory R1 rotation included structured instruction in report quality, with faculty supervised on-line revision before signature. Using a modified version of a previously presented method of scoring clarity (0=beat), comparison of mean report length and clarity was made between resident year groups in two samples (n=66 and n=104) of reports obtained a year apart, before and after this initiative.

Results: In 1993, the mean report clarity of Rf's (1.47) was worse than of R2-R4's (1.03). Conversely, the specifically trained 1994 Rl 's had significantly clearer reports (0.74) than their senior colleagues (1.14), p=.OS, Students t test. In both years, the Rl 's had the shortest reports.

Conclusion: These findings support expansion to a department-wide campaign for improved report quality, with particular attention to maintaining brevity. A comprehensive evaluation including effects on accuracy and timeliness is ongoing.

10-3 Chairman's Rounds for Radiology Residents Thomas J. Cusack, M.D. University of Illinois.

10-4 Fourth Year Medical Student's Attitudes Toward Radiology EllaA. Kazerooni, M.D., C.E. Blane, A.E. Schlesinger, K.H. Vydareny, M.D. University of Michigan Medical Center.

Purpose:

Methods:

Results:

Conclusion:

To involve department chairmen (or others with extensive administrative or research responsibilities) in direct education of residents in all areas of diagnostic imaging in an effective, time-efficiear manner.

The chairman has two, one-hour sessions with the~esidents per week. One of these sessions involves case presentations with an obvious imaging finding upon which the residents will develop a written differential diagnosis. A discussion of the differential diagnosis is then led by the Chairman. Subsequently, the residents' listings of differential diagnoses are graded by the Chairman and returned to the residents.

The second one-hour session is spent in a textbook review. In addition to discussing the material reviewed for that session, the Chairman quizzes the residents and maintains a record of the questions asked, the resident who responded, and the grade for that response,

The exercise has been extremely successful from both the residents' and the chairman's perspective. The format has evolved slightly to the format presented in this abstract.

This is a workable format for radiology department chairmen who sense that their involvement in direct teaching is less than they had projected or whose ability to remain "current" across the broad spectrum of radiology has been compromised by administrative responsibilities.

Purpose: To determine the graduating medical students perception of radiology and document changes since entering medical school.

Methods: The preliminary questionaire results from the entering class of 1994 were presented at the AUR in 1991. The fnilow-up questionaire to the same class with matched questions was completed anonymously by 144 medical school graduates.

Results: Factors with a major impact on specialty choice included intellectual excitement (96%), high patient contact (86%), opportunity for a good family life (72%) and regular hours. Radiology was perceived to be a well-paid (89%), high tech (86%) specialty with a healthy 5festyle, regular hours (99%) and good family life (92%), but little patient contact (95%) and intellectually exciting to only one-third of students. Perception was unchanged from freshman year. Size of school loans (46% loans > $50,000), risk of malpractice and AIDS had little or no influence on choice of specialty for 81-83%. Only 15% of students indicated that health cam reform issues influenced their choice. 52% entered primary care (medicine, pediatrics, family practice, OB/GYN), with a statistcially significant difference (p <.05) in the 37% of males and 70% of females entering primary care, whether including OB/GYN or not including OB/GYN as a primary care field.

Conduslons: This 4 year longitudinal study of a medical school class documents surprizingly little change in perception of Radiology through medical school Though indebtedness had significantly increased, health care changes are sweeping the country, and AIDS is increasing, these factors had little or no influence on career choices.

1152