ABSTRACT
Background Among all the modalities of diagnostic radiology, ultrasonography is considered the least invasive one. However, this benefit usually comes at the cost of its subjective evaluation since it is purely a dynamic diagnostic modality. Thus, instead of ultrasonography, most clinicians usually rely on the report written by the radiologist. Objective The objective of this study is to evaluate the clinical practices of ultrasound reporting of superficial soft tissue masses. Materials and methods A closed-loop retrospective and prospective study was conducted at the Department of Radiology and Medical Imaging, Jinnah Hospital, Lahore between December 2023 and March 2024. In the pre-intervention phase, a randomly collected sample of 100 ultrasound reports documenting superficial soft tissue masses were included in the study and judged against standard criteria set by the Royal College of Radiologists (RCR). The intervention phase included regular presentations, identification of problems, and designing of preformed reporting forms. Post-intervention assessments were based on the judgment of 100 ultrasound reports in each cycle twice. Intervention and post-intervention assessments were done twice to correct the ongoing practices. Results During the pre-intervention phase, the ultrasound reports issued by the department of study showed only 41.5% compliance with the RCR structured reporting guidelines. However, after the first and second post-intervention phases, this percentage increased up to 98.3%. Overall, we observed a compliance difference of 56.5% between the pre-intervention and second post-intervention phases. Conclusion Integration of methods, such as briefing the residents on RCR guidelines, displaying parameters, and making structured report templates available, can greatly increase adherence to RCR guidelines for structured ultrasonography reporting. It also greatly enhances the comprehensiveness and reliability of ultrasonography reports for clinicians. Clinical audits should be routinely practiced in the settings of radiology.
ABSTRACT
Background Artificial intelligence (AI) refers to the simulation of human intelligence processes by machines, enabling them to perform tasks. The advancements in AI have also improved virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR) and mixed reality (MR) experience allowing a greater opportunity for use in the field of medicine. Objective To evaluate the knowledge, attitude and practice of AI and types of realities among Pakistani healthcare professionals (HCPs). Materials and methods This was a prospective, nationwide study designed at the Department of Neurosurgery at Punjab Institute of Neurosciences (PINS), Lahore, was conducted between January 2024 to February 2024. More than 500 HCPs were approached, out of which 176 participated in this survey consensually. A pre-formed general questionnaire based on knowledge, attitude and practices of AI and types of realities was modified according to local conditions. Google Forms (Google Inc., USA) was used to conduct the one-time sign up response. Statistical Package for Social Sciences (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 24, USA) was used to analyze submitted responses. Results About 69.9% respondents were male HCPs. Most of the respondents were from the fields of neurosurgery, medicine and general surgery, i.e., 10.80%, 10.20% and 4%, respectively. More than 90% HCPs used Internet and electronic devices daily. A majority of 62.50% respondents agreed that AI brings benefits for the patients, while at the same time, 45.50% agreed that they would not trust the assessment of AI more than that of HCPs. 61% HCPs feared that AI-based systems could be manipulated from the outside sources, like terrorists and hackers. Although 90% respondents knew the definition of AR and VR, a strikingly low 40% respondents could only identify the practical applications of these realities when asked in a mini-quiz. About 61.40% HCPs never used any AI-based application throughout their clinical practice, but Google Health was used by 29.50% respondents, followed by Remote Patient Monitoring AI application used by 3.4% individuals. Conclusion There is an evident under-utilization of AI and types of realities in clinical practice in Pakistan. Lack of awareness, paucity of resources and conventional clinical practices are the key reasons identified. Pakistan is on the path towards the point where the developed world is currently. There is a potential to move past the initial stages of AI implementation and into more advanced modes of adopting AI and types of realities.
