• Andreas G Schreyer, Britta Rosenberg, and René T Steinhäuser.
• Nuklearmedizin. 2018 Sep 1; 57 (5): 204-209.

BackgroundBecause of an increasing number of boards and conferences, the number of second opinion readings of externally acquired image data is growing dramatically. In this review article we intend to give medical and legal recommendations for the documentation and interpretation of externally acquired radiological data for second opinions and board presentations based on German jurisdiction.MethodUsing the FAQ format as a dialog between radiologists and medical legal experts, we answer the most crucial questions regarding correct documentation and interpretation for externally acquired radiological image data based on an up-to-date literature search.ResultsBased on the unity of radiological image data and the corresponding written report according to the radiation protection law, the primary report should be present when composing a second opinion. If the primary external report is not present, this should be mentioned as a limitation. All radiological second opinions should be documented in written form. This is especially important in cases of discrepant findings. Legally, the attending physician is responsible for selecting the radiological opinion. The radiologist should not rely on the written primary report without personal reevaluation. Legally, it would be considered radiological malpractice if the external image data and previous image data are not evaluated personally.ConclusionFrom a legal point of view, there are explicit recommendations regarding thorough documentation of a second opinion as an independent medical service in all cases.Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

16 keywords...

hide…