Page 49 - Diagnostic Radiology - Interpreting the Risks Part One

SVMIC Diagnostic Radiology: Interpreting the Risks

providers, the radiologist will develop a better sense of

rapport and strike the correct balance; but when in doubt, the
radiologist should always default to picking up the phone and

contacting the referring provider. Patient safety should always
be a greater concern than the fear of irritating a colleague or

being labeled a nuisance.

The ACR Guidelines: Friend or Foe?

As guidance, the latest 2014 revision of the ACR Practice
Parameters for Communication of Diagnostic Imaging Findings

contains language that suggests the communication of a
diagnosis is as important as the diagnosis itself. The document

outlines specific situations in which the radiologist, “should
expedite the delivery of a diagnostic imaging report in a

manner… that insures timely receipt of the finding”. Although
the various ACR guidelines do not necessarily reflect the

standard of care (and clearly disclaim in their preamble that
they are intended to establish the standard of care), they,

nevertheless, carry significant legal weight and plaintiffs’
lawyers know more about the ACR Guidelines than most

radiologists.

The ACR publishes an annual Practice Guidelines and Technical
Standards. Because of its preeminence, the ACR’s Guidelines

and Standards are extremely authoritative from a legal
standpoint. Notwithstanding the fact that the ACR explicitly

states in its printed material that its Guidelines do not constitute
or reflect the standard of care, these Guidelines and Standards

do greatly influence the court. As one state Supreme Court
noted, “we do not hold that the standards in and of themselves

establish a standard of care, but the published standards or

Page 49