Aarhus University Seal / Aarhus Universitets segl

Jørgen Frøkiær

Guidance document for structured reporting of diuresis renography

Research output: Contribution to journal/Conference contribution in journal/Contribution to newspaperJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  • Andrew T Taylor
  • ,
  • M Donald Blaufox
  • ,
  • Diego De Palma
  • ,
  • Eva V Dubovsky
  • ,
  • Belkis Erbaş
  • ,
  • Anni Eskild-Jensen, Denmark
  • Jørgen Frøkiær
  • Muta M Issa
  • ,
  • Amy Piepsz
  • ,
  • Alain Prigent
This Guidance Document for structured reporting of diuresis renography in adults was developed by the International Scientific Committee of Radionuclides in Nephro-urology (ISCORN; http://www.iscorn.org). ISCORN chose diuresis renography for its first structured report Guidance Document because suspected obstruction is the most common reason for referral, most radionuclide renal studies are conducted at institutions that perform fewer than 3 studies per week, and a large percentage of studies are interpreted by physicians with limited training in nuclear medicine. Ten panelists were asked to categorize specific reporting elements as essential, recommended, optional (without sufficient data to support a higher ranking), and unnecessary (does not contribute to scan interpretation or quality assurance). The final document was developed through an iterative series of comments and questionnaires with a majority vote required to place an element in a specific category. The Guidance Document recommends a reporting structure organized into indications, clinical history, study procedure, findings and impression and specifies the elements considered essential or recommended in each category. The Guidance Document is not intended to be restrictive but, rather, to provide a basic structure and rationale so that the diuresis renography report will: (1) communicate the results to the referring physician in a clear and concise manner designed to optimize patient care; (2) contain the essential elements required to evaluate and interpret the study; (3) clearly document the technical components of the study necessary for accountability, quality assurance and reimbursement; and (4) encourage clinical research by facilitating better comparison and extrapolation of results between institutions.
Original languageEnglish
JournalSeminars in Nuclear Medicine
Volume42
Issue1
Pages (from-to)41-8
Number of pages8
ISSN0001-2998
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2012

See relations at Aarhus University Citationformats

ID: 41924133