Table 2.

Comparison of types of communication, providers and imaging for diagnostic imaging alerts with and without timely follow-up at 4-weeks

	Lack of Timely Follow- Up n = 92 (7.7)		Timely Follow-Up n = 1104 (92.3)		p- value
	n	(%)	n	(%)
Alert Status					p = 0.22
Acknowledged	71	(77.2)	908	(82.2)
Unacknowledged	21	(22.8)	196	(17.8)
Communication Characteristics					p < 0.0001
Electronic Alert Communication*	84	(11.3)	661	(88.7)
Electronic Alert + Verbal Communication **	3	(1.5)	203	(98.5)
Electronic Alert + Admission †	5	(2.9)	167	(97.1)
Electronic Alert + Verbal Communication + Admission ‡	0	(0.0)	73	(100.0)
Ordering provider Characteristics					p = 0.09
Attending physician	44	(6.3)	652	(93.7)
Physician Assistants	21	(8.7)	220	(91.3)
Trainees (Interns, Residents, Fellows)^	19	(9.9)	173	(90.1)
Nurse Practitioners	8	(11.9)	59	(88.1)
Types of Abnormal Imaging Reported					p = 0.0016
X- ray	52	(9.1)	520	(90.9)
CT Scan	25	(5.4)	434	(94.6)
Ultrasound	10	(9.6)	94	(90.4)
MRI	4	(6.7)	56	(93.3)
Mammography	1	(100.0)	0	(0.0)
Ordering Provider Specialty					p = 0.12
Primary Care	57	(9.5)	544	(90.5)
Emergency Medicine	8	(3.0)	256	(97.0)
Hematology/ Oncology	4	(8.0)	46	(92.0)
Pulmonary Disease	3	(7.5)	37	(92.5)
General Surgery	3	(7.9)	35	(92.1)
Specialty Surgery	11	(9.2)	109	(90.8)
Other Medical Specialties	5	(8.2)	56	(91.8)
Other Non-specified Specialties	1	(4.6)	21	(95.4)
Dual Communication					p = 0.17
Dual	53	(8.7)	554	(91.3)
Single	39	(6.6)	550	(93.4)

^*Only electronic communication of alert

^**Electronic and verbal communication of alert

^†Electronic communication of alert followed by a hospital admission prior to chart review

^‡Electronic and verbal communication of alert followed by a hospital admission prior to chart review

^{^}Trainees who provide care in our outpatient setting do so at an average of ½-1 day every 2 weeks.