| ORIGINAL ARTICLE |
|
| Year : 2021 | Volume
: 2
| Issue : 1 | Page : 18-23 |
|
|
Radiology request form: Evaluating its complete filling in South-South, Nigeria
Ebbi Donald Robinson1, Olukumni Yetunde Ijeruh1, Woroma Wonodi2, Rufus Abam1, Chidinma Wekhe1
1 Department of Radiology, Rivers State University Teaching Hospital, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria
2 Department of Paediatrics, Rivers State University Teaching Hospital, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria
Correspondence Address:
Ebbi Donald Robinson
Department of Radiology, Rivers State University Teaching Hospital, Port Harcourt, Rivers State
Nigeria
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
DOI: 10.4103/JRMT.JRMT_36_20
|
|
|
Introduction: Radiology request form (RRF) is a medical referral to a radiologist requesting input concerning the diagnosis, treatment, follow-up of patients, and intervention where necessary. The RRF usually provides information on the patient(s) and the investigation(s) being requested. Methodology: This was a cross-sectional descriptive study, in which request forms were retrospectively reviewed over a period of 6 months in the Radiology Department of the Rivers State University Teaching Hospital. A total of 1131 request forms filled by medical doctors were analyzed to ascertain the degree of completeness of filling the forms. The data were collated and analyzed using the IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 23. The results were expressed in simple percentages, frequencies, and presented in tables, charts, and graphs. Results: Ultrasonography was the most requested radiologic investigation (55.4%), while X-ray and computed tomography scan account for 41.4% and 1.1%, respectively. Majority of the forms had adequately entered date of request (97.7%) and required investigation and patient's names (99.6%). Patient's age was appropriately entered in 51.9% of cases, while 34.1% kept the space blank. Clinical information was indicated in 50.8% of the forms, while 97.2% did not include history of patient's allergy as regards the use of radiopharmaceutical agents. The patient's consultant and resident's doctor names were appropriately entered in 72.1% and 81.7% of the request forms, respectively. Signature authentication by the resident doctor is available in 13.2% of the request forms. Conclusion: It was observed that majority of the RRFs were not completely and appropriately filled; thus, complete information regarding the patient is not provided to the radiologist to enhance report accuracy. Clinical information if adequately provided can improve the quality of patient management, follow-up, training, and research.
|
|
|
|
| [FULL TEXT] [PDF]* |
|
 |
|
