Q&A: Christoph Lee on the relationship between patients and their online radiology reports

According to a recent study published in Academic Radiology, more than 51 percent of all patients with access to at least one online radiology report viewed it online. Lead author Christoph Lee, MD, MSHS, department of radiology at the University of Washington School of Medicine in Seattle, spoke to Radiology Business about his team’s research and why it is so important for patients to have online access to their own reports.

Radiology Business: What are the benefits for patients who view their own radiology reports? Are there benefits for radiology as a whole? 

Christoph Lee, MD, MSHS: Greater interaction among patients and radiology reports will likely improve patient-centered care. Patients can benefit from understanding how imaging studies are affecting their course of care. For radiologists and radiology as a whole, patients will be more likely to appreciate the central role that radiologists play in their care.

Your study looked at the actions of more than 61,000 patients and found that 51 percent of them viewed their online radiology report. Did that number surprise you and your fellow researchers? What percentage were you expecting?

We weren’t surprised that more than half of patients with a radiology report available were viewing their report. So much of diagnostic evaluation and treatment plans are dictated by advanced imaging. Thus, patients often are anxious to know about the results of pivotal diagnostic studies as soon as possible.

While 51 percent represents a majority of patients, it still means approximately 49 percent of the patients did not view their online radiology report. What steps do you think the imaging industry can take to improve that percentage in the future?

For many of these patients who did not view their radiology reports, they may have learned about their results from referring physicians given the delay before radiology reports became available online. For some patients, they may not be adept at utilizing patient portals. Patients should be encouraged to be more active in their care, including understanding the impact of imaging studies on their healthcare decisions.

Do you think the technology involved with reading online reports is the biggest obstacle for those not accessing their reports? Or is it something else entirely?

Many patients do not realize that a highly trained physician, other than their clinician, is interpreting their imaging studies separately and reporting the findings to the referring clinician. If more patients realized that radiologists were providing an independent reading of their imaging studies, they may be more likely to want to see and review final radiology reports.

Your study revealed that 59 percent of patients viewed online lab reports. Why do you think that number is higher than it was for rad reports? Do you think that could change over time?

Laboratory reports, unlike radiology reports, come with normal ranges. They may be more interpretable by patients than radiology reports that do not come with normal ranges or a reference standard. I do think that this will change over time, though, as more patients view radiology reports and go searching for their meaning on the web. Radiology reports will have to become more patient-friendly.

What does this study say about the future of healthcare, and imaging in particular?

I believe that more patients viewing their radiology reports is just a stepping stone to direct patient consultations by radiologists. In certain circumstances, patients may benefit from discussing their imaging findings with radiologists, especially for cancer screening and surveillance. Radiologists should encourage these transformations in an era of value-based reimbursement.

Michael Walter
Michael Walter, Managing Editor

Michael has more than 18 years of experience as a professional writer and editor. He has written at length about cardiology, radiology, artificial intelligence and other key healthcare topics.

Around the web

The patient, who was being cared for in the ICU, was not accompanied or monitored by nursing staff during his exam, despite being sedated.

The nuclear imaging isotope shortage of molybdenum-99 may be over now that the sidelined reactor is restarting. ASNC's president says PET and new SPECT technologies helped cardiac imaging labs better weather the storm.

CMS has more than doubled the CCTA payment rate from $175 to $357.13. The move, expected to have a significant impact on the utilization of cardiac CT, received immediate praise from imaging specialists.