471-16 | Assessing the Quality of Vascular Ultrasound Examinations Using the IAC QI Self-Assessment Tool-471-16

471-16

Pdf Summary

This research article investigates the agreement between vascular technologists and interpreting physicians in assessing the quality of vascular ultrasound examinations using the Intersocietal Accreditation Commission (IAC) Quality Improvement (QI) Self-Assessment Tool. The study involved 4 vascular technologists and 4 interpreting physicians who independently evaluated 100 carotid Doppler and 100 lower extremity venous Doppler examinations. The Gwet’s First-Order Agreement Coefficient (AC1) statistic was calculated to determine inter-rater and intra-rater agreement. The results showed substantial to almost perfect agreement among all reviewers for most of the quality review questions. The lowest agreement was seen in questions related to technical quality and case review sections for both examination types. The intra-rater agreement among interpreting physicians was in the almost perfect range, while for vascular technologists, it ranged from slight to almost perfect. The study suggests that while there is agreement on most aspects of examination quality, there are areas for improvement, particularly related to technical quality and case review. The authors emphasize the importance of continuous training and communication between vascular technologists and interpreting physicians to ensure the highest quality examinations. The study highlights the potential benefits of periodic internal quality reviews and increased collaboration between technologists and physicians. This research contributes to the understanding of the role of vascular technologists in performing and assessing ultrasound examinations and suggests strategies for improving efficiency and maintaining examination quality.

Keywords

vascular technologists

interpreting physicians

vascular ultrasound examinations

IAC Quality Improvement

Gwet’s First-Order Agreement Coefficient

inter-rater agreement

intra-rater agreement

technical quality

case review

examination quality