Resource Library

With many radiology cases, it is only in hindsight — with the knowledge that there is, in fact, an abnormality — that the abnormality can then be identified by comparison.¹ Consider how the outcome of this case might have been different if the second radiologist had more thoughtfully reported the discrepancies in imaging interpretation.

Incidental findings of lung nodules are common and frequently missed. Many of these missed nodules are clinically irrelevant.¹ However, when a patient who is diagnosed with advanced lung cancer discovers there was an unreported incidental finding during a period when the lung cancer was treatable, a negligence claim is likely. Consider how improved communication could have affected the outcome of the following radiology case study.

Misdiagnosed breast cancer is one of the most common claims against radiologists.¹ Although much of the onus for ensuring that follow-up occurs is on the referring physician, all providers involved in the patient’s care should establish and then follow policies on communication of radiologic diagnosis and testing. Had communication roles been clear, this patient’s breast cancer could have been discovered earlier and a lawsuit could have been averted.

A “curbside” consultation can be described as an event in which one physician informally asks another for information or advice to aid in the management of a particular patient. A curbside consultation can also include an informal encounter with a “patient” who asks for and receives medical advice in an informal setting. In general, the “curbside consultant” does not review the patient’s medical record, but instead bases advice on information provided by the requesting physician or patient – information that may be incomplete and/or inaccurate