What’s inside: monitoring · output checking
The question this file answersWho checks that an abnormal imaging report reached a clinician today, not when admin got round to filing?
Fits: providers where results, scripts and traceability paperwork wait on manual filing.
Typical pattern, not a measured department — the healthcare playbook calls lab-result volume continuous, spiking with screening programmes, and gives none for imaging. Reports land in a work queue; admin files each to the EHR, notifies the requester and answers 'are my results in?'. Normal and abnormal wait the same time.
During the morning, the radiology admin desk sees the reports that need a hand — an unreadable requester, a critical flag without an acknowledgement — rather than the whole day's filing. The clinician finds the abnormal report at the top, not in the pile.
Typical, not a measured client result. Every figure here comes from the playbook source named below.
normal reports filed per protocol, abnormal ones to a clinician — the same build as our lab-results file; no published figure for imaging
Before: normal and abnormal reports share the same filing delay. After: normal reports are filed per protocol and the abnormal ones sit at the top of a clinician's queue. The percentage lives on the lab-results file, not here.
Imaging-report distribution is not measured separately in any source we cite. Accenture (2023) reports 40–60% faster result distribution — that study is about lab results and stays on the lab file; we do not transfer it. Interpretation is never automated.
The EHR and your imaging system stay — Epic, Cerner, MEDITECH or whichever you run. Same build as our lab-results file, pointed at imaging:
Reading the image. Interpreting the finding. Follow-up decisions. Counselling the patient.
The build relies on the radiologist's own flag or wording; an abnormal finding described without a flag is filed as routine — which is why the notification protocol, not the model, decides who is told. Sites without an HL7/FHIR interface work from PDF report feeds, and reading quality drops. Accenture's 40–60% faster distribution is measured on lab results and lives on the parent file; imaging has no figure of its own.
The path: free 60-second estimate → free 20-minute review → paid audit of this one process (€1.5–3K, typically two weeks) → pilot with your people in the loop (€10–20K, weeks, not quarters). No transformation programme. Prices are public, on the services page →
Scoped in the audit — the playbook has no estimate for this exact desk.
That depends on your volumes and wage costs — this page will not invent the number. The free 60-second estimate runs that calculation from your answers, with every multiplier sourced.
Not a named Aperanda client. Process file · Healthcare.
Short process file. Same build as its parent file; the playbook has no separate volume or benchmark for this desk.