It can be difficult to decipher who has final say in radiology reports. Part 1 of 2.
Preliminary. Final. The words don’t remotely look or sound the same. Pretty much anyone with a grasp of the language could tell you their meanings are, to say the least, dissimilar.
The terms take on more specific applications during radiology residency, or indeed any postgraduate medical training in facilities that do not have 24/7/365 attending coverage. A “Prelim” report of a diagnostic-imaging study is one that has been furnished by a trainee, and focused on answering important questions of the moment…appendicitis, bleed, stroke, etc. When the attending radiologist reviews cases later on and makes necessary changes, the report is either amended to become (or entirely replaced by) a “Final.”
Many rads exiting residency leave the concept of a “Prelim” report behind them as they enter the “real world,” now attendings themselves. They might occasionally ask peers for input on challenging cases, but otherwise when they sign off a report, that’s the formal word. Clinicians know that, barring the creation of an addendum, the report is not awaiting approval by a rad with more experience.
I was therefore somewhat surprised when, upon my entry into the teleradiology scene, I found that even highly capable, Board-certified radiologists were routinely furnishing “Prelim” reports. And not just the telerads - sometimes, even the onsite radiologists who were providing night coverage were supplying Prelim reads for their facilities.
Taken at face value, it made sense: a single rad providing night-coverage for an entire hospital (or several) was not expected to generate formal reports for every study performed on his watch. Things would frequently be too busy to permit greater thoroughness, prior studies might not be available for comparison until the next day, subspecialty reads might ultimately be demanded, etc. Further, onsite rads (or their hospitals) might not trust offsite coverage, but rather wish to review each and every overnight report for accuracy.
In acknowledgement of the differences between a “Prelim” and a “Final” report (which might run one line and a couple of pages in length, respectively), not to mention the differences in liability, “Finals” seemed to get paid at better rates. In at least some of the telerad outfits I considered, this difference was passed along to the radiologists actually doing the interpretations. It might make sense for the fraction to be proportional to the differences in work (for instance, if it takes an average rad twice as long to render a “Final” as it does a “Prelim,” a “Prelim” might reasonably pay half as much), but I suspect negotiations between the telerad firms and the facilities they covered were based more on supply/demand factors.
As if all of that wasn’t complicated enough for a telerad newbie like myself, the definitions of “Prelim” and “Final” started getting murkier. More on that next time.
Where Things Stand with the Radiologist Shortage
June 18th 2025A new report conveys the cumulative impact of ongoing challenges with radiologist residency positions, reimbursement, post-COVID-19 attrition rates and the aging of the population upon the persistent shortage of radiologists in the United States.
How to Successfully Launch a CCTA Program at Your Hospital or Practice
June 11th 2025Emphasizing increasing recognition of the capability of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) for the evaluation of acute and stable chest pain, this author defuses common misperceptions and reviews key considerations for implementation of a CCTA program.
The Reading Room: Artificial Intelligence: What RSNA 2020 Offered, and What 2021 Could Bring
December 5th 2020Nina Kottler, M.D., chief medical officer of AI at Radiology Partners, discusses, during RSNA 2020, what new developments the annual meeting provided about these technologies, sessions to access, and what to expect in the coming year.
Mammography AI Platform for Five-Year Breast Cancer Risk Prediction Gets FDA De Novo Authorization
June 2nd 2025Through AI recognition of subtle patterns in breast tissue on screening mammograms, the Clairity Breast software reportedly provides validated risk scoring for predicting one’s five-year risk of breast cancer.