ArticleAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP2025
Using FMEA to Reduce the Risk of Delayed Reporting of Critical Radiological Results in Oncology: A Patient Safety Initiative.
Article in Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTimely communication of critical radiological findings is vital in oncology, where delays may jeopardize treatment and patient safety. Despite existing protocols, challenges such as manual reporting, unclear escalation paths, and resource limitations still contribute to delays. PURPOSE: This study applied Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) to identify and address high-risk failure points in reporting critical radiology results at an oncology center.
methodsConducted at a specialized oncology center in Amman, Jordan, this quality improvement project used a pre-and-post intervention design. A multidisciplinary team including radiologists, oncologists, IT staff, quality officers, and nurses applied the FMEA framework to assess the reporting process. Failure modes were scored using Severity, Occurrence, and Detection critera to calculate Risk Priority Numbers (RPNs). Key interventions included: 1. Automated alerts integrated with the Electronic Health Record (EHR), 2. Standardized escalation protocols, 3. Staff retraining, 4. Structured documentation, and 5. Enhanced interoperability across PACS-RIS-EHR systems. Compliance was monitored monthly over a 12 months period.
resultsPre-intervention RPNs ranged from 280 to 350, with major risks identified in unrecognized findings (RPN=320), lack of physician notification (310), unclear protocols (330), and insufficient emergency coverage (350). Post-intervention analysis showed RPN reductions of 54-62%. Recognition of critical findings improved by 55%, notification by 58%, protocol adherence by 62%, and emergency staffing by 54%. Improvements were linked to automation, clearer workflows, and better system integration. Statistical testing confirmed significant compliance improvement and reduced monthly variation.
conclusionFMEA effectively identified and mitigated critical failures in radiology reporting. Integrating technology and cross-disciplinary collaboration enhanced reporting timeliness, compliance, and patient safety in oncology care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.