Implementation of peer learning conferences throughout a multi-site abdominal radiology practice

Purpose To initiate a peer learning conference for our abdominal radiology division across multiple geographically separated sites and different time zones, and to determine radiologist preference for peer learning versus traditional score-based peer review. Methods We implemented a monthly peer lea...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Abdominal imaging 2021-12, Vol.46 (12), p.5489-5499
Main Authors: Bowman, Andrew W., Tan, Nelly, Adamo, Daniel A., Chen, Frederick, Venkatesh, Sudhakar K., Baumgarten, Deborah A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Abdomen
Conferences
Gastroenterology
Hepatology
Humans
Imaging
Learning
Medical education
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Peer Review
Peer tutoring
Perspective
Physicians
Polls & surveys
Quality control
Questions
Radiography, Abdominal
Radiologists
Radiology
Surveys and Questionnaires
Video teleconferencing
Videoconferencing
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Purpose To initiate a peer learning conference for our abdominal radiology division across multiple geographically separated sites and different time zones, and to determine radiologist preference for peer learning versus traditional score-based peer review. Methods We implemented a monthly peer learning videoconference for our abdominal radiology division. Surveys regarding radiologist opinion regarding traditional peer review and the new peer learning conferences were conducted before and after 6 months of conferences. Results Peer learning conferences were well attended across our multiple sites, with an average of 43 participants per conference. Radiologist opinion regarding peer review was poor, with survey radiologists responding positively to only 1 out of 12 process questions. Opinion regarding peer learning was extremely favorable, with radiologists responding positively to 12 out of the same 12 process questions. After 6 months of peer learning conferences, 87.9% of surveyed radiologists wished to continue them in some fashion, and no one preferred to return to score-based peer review alone. Conclusion We successfully implemented a peer learning conference for our abdominal radiology division spread out over multiple geographic sites. Our radiologists strongly preferred peer learning conferences over our traditional peer review system for quality control.
ISSN:2366-004X
2366-0058
DOI:10.1007/s00261-021-03114-8