Automatic Protocolling of Non-contrast Musculoskeletal MRIs Does Not Result in Increase in Patient Recall Rates for Contrast-Enhanced Studies

Rationale and Objectives: Physicians spend large amounts of time on protocolling imaging studies, limiting their time spent on other essential clinical tasks. Most musculoskeletal (MSK) MRI studies are performed for the evaluation of joint pain and internal derangements and usually require no intravenous contrast. Contrast-enhanced MRI studies are performed for the evaluation of infection, suspected or established tumor, and rheumatological conditions. Protocolling all MSK MRI studies takes time away from other important tasks during the workday. Routine joint MRI scans have established set of sequences, and thus, could be scheduled and performed without special protocols by the radiologists. In a large tertiary care center like ours with multiple MRI magnets, we set up a process of automated protocoling and scheduling of non-contrast joint MRI scans ordered by referring doctors. This project's purpose was to assess the effect of this newly established process of ‘automatic protocoling and scheduling’ of MSK MRI scans on the rate of overlooked MRI exams that may have required contrast examinations, and on the patient recall-rate to obtain follow-up post-contrast sequences for further diagnostic characterization. Methods: All MSK reports of MRIs during the last two months of the years before and after the implementation of automatic protocolling (intervention) were searched for the presence of indications related to neoplasms, infections, and rheumatological conditions. For each of the three disease categories, we determined the number of MRIs obtained with and without contrast before and after the intervention. For each matching study obtained without contrast, the patient chart was reviewed for contraindications to contrast, positive final diagnosis, whether interpreting radiologist mentioned the exam being limited by lack of contrast, and recommendations for a follow-up contrast enhanced study. Results: A total of 846 MSK MRIs were performed prior to intervention and 822 MRIs were performed afterwards. Overall, 25% of the studies were performed without contrast prior to the intervention, and 31% of studies were performed without contrast afterwards (Chi square 0.07, p-value 0.79). No report contained a recommendation for contrast enhanced follow-up study before or after the intervention. Conclusion: Automatic protocolling of routine MSK non-contrast MRI studies resulted in statistically insignificant, minimal increase in the overall number of non-contrast enhanced studies obtained for work up of neoplasms, infections, and rheumatological conditions. There was no increase in patient recall rate for additional post contrast sequences and the new process resulted in time savings to fellows and other physicians, being not distracted from other important tasks.