LAUSR

ObjectivesTo evaluate whether template-based structured reports (SRs) add clinical value to primary CT staging in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) compared to free-text reports (FTRs).MethodsIn this two-centre study SRs and FTRs were acquired for 16 CT examinations. Thirty-two reports were independently scored by four haematologists using a questionnaire addressing completeness of information, structure, guidance for patient management and overall quality. The questionnaire included yes-no, 10-point Likert scale and 5-point scale questions. Altogether 128 completed questionnaires were evaluated. Non-parametric Wilcoxon signed-rank test and McNemar’s test were used for statistical analysis.ResultsSRs contained information on affected organs more often than FTRs (95 % vs. 66 %). More SRs commented on extranodal involvement (91 % vs. 62 %). Sufficient information for Ann-Arbor classification was included in more SRs (89 % vs. 64 %). Information extraction was quicker from SRs (median rating on 10-point Likert scale=9 vs. 6; 7–10 vs. 4–8 interquartile range). SRs had better comprehensibility (9 vs. 7; 8–10 vs. 5–8). Contribution of SRs to clinical decision-making was higher (9 vs. 6; 6–10 vs. 3–8). SRs were of higher quality (p < 0.001). All haematologists preferred SRs over FTRs.ConclusionsStructured reporting of CT examinations for primary staging in patients with DLBCL adds clinical value compared to FTRs by increasing completeness of reports, facilitating information extraction and improving patient management.Key Points• Structured reporting in CT helps clinicians to assess patients with lymphoma.• This two-centre study showed that structured reporting improves information content and extraction.• Patient management may be improved by structured reporting.• Clinicians preferred structured reports over free-text reports.