A large part of my time as chief radiologist of a Teleradiology group goes into report quality assurance review and analysis. This is a very challenging task that involves wearing many different hats at the same time
a) Radiologist- there is a need to review and objectively analyze the images for myself and determine whether in fact a finding has been inadequately or incompletely addressed.
b) Judge – as an adjudicator, I have to sit in judgment when a client points out a discrepancy and my peer disagrees. This is probably the hardest part of the role, requiring me to be objective even when I may have strong feelings one way or another.
c) Diplomat – I have to be able to sensitively yet politely communicate differences of opinion between radiologists. Not infrequently the responses to discrepancy notifications require editing when they express the not unjustifiable anguish of the radiologist whose professional sensibilities have been offended by what is deemed by him or her as an inappropriate QA.
d) Researcher- when something is not self-evident, I need to review the literature on the subject to enlighten myself and help support my point of view.
e) Statistician – I need to spot/detect trends, if any, in the process.
f) Teacher/mentor – I need to use the data engendered by the process to train myself and my peers/colleagues to constantly improve and update our skills.
While I have an excellent, capable and indispensable set of colleagues who work with my in this process, I still find that after an hour of QA review and discussion, my head begins to throb – as this is one of the most intellectually taxing exercises I perform. However, for any teleradiology
outfit worth its salt, and certainly for one that was ranked best in KLAS, this process and the effort therein, is a critical necessity.