调查分析我国超声报告模板使用现状及超声医师相关需求。

以我国不同省市自治区直辖市的各级医院的超声医师为调查对象，采用互联网线上方式对超声报告模板使用现状，高效、规范化超声报告模板的主观需求程度进行调查分析。采用R×C列联表χ²检验，比较分析不同级别医院超声医师反馈之间的差异。

本调查共收回有效答卷3863份，除香港特别行政区、澳门特别行政区及台湾省之外的全国31个省级行政区均有超声医师响应了此次问卷调查。问卷应答率方面：在地理分布、医院级别、职称类型方面均有一定差异，其中华北地区、三级医院、主治医师应答率最高，分别为30.44%（1176/3863）、53.46%（2065/3863）和41.11%（1588/3863）。无超声工作站和有超声工作站但无报告模板者共96份（2.49%，96/3863）答卷，有超声工作站并有报告模板者3767份（97.51%，3767/3863）答卷。在超声报告模板使用高效性方面：43.40%（1635/3767）的超声医师反馈需要用鼠标或键盘操作≥4步才能调出报告模板；93.05%（3505/3767）的超声医师表示，在遇到阳性病例时，“经常需要”或“一般需要”在报告模板的基础上修改较多文字；对于常见病是否都有超声报告模板的调查，“几乎全部常见病都有模板”者仅占37.09%（1397/3767），而常见病的不同严重程度是否有相应的报告模板方面，仅35.07%（1321/3767）的超声医师反馈有。在超声报告模板规范化方面：对于报告模板内容描述是否全面的调查，仅16.11%（607/3767）的超声医师认为所在科室报告模板内容描述“非常全面”；以甲状腺结节分级诊断（甲状腺超声影像报告和数据系统）所描述内容为标准，仅22.40%（832/3715）的超声医师反馈每一份甲状腺结节报告均描述全面；针对报告模板术语是否规范的调查，仅13.75%（518/3767）的超声医师认为所在科室报告模板术语使用“非常规范”，56.78%（2139/3767）的超声医师反馈所在科室超声报告模板中有“光点”“光团”等文字。对高效、规范化超声报告模板的主观需求方面：98.52%（3806/3863）的超声医师反馈需要一套使用高效、内容规范的超声报告模板。不同级别医院超声医师对所有上述几方面调查问题的答复，差异均具有统计学意义（P均＜0.01），三级医院的超声报告模板在高效性及规范程度方面优于其他级别医院。

目前我国超声报告模板在使用高效性及规范化程度方面均存在一定的不足，多数超声医师希望有一套使用高效的规范化超声报告模板。

To investigate the current status of the use of ultrasound report templates in China and the related needs of ultrasound doctors.

Ultrasound doctors at all levels of hospitals in different provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities directly under the central government in China were surveyed using an Internet online method to investigate the current status of ultrasound report template use and the degree of ultrasound doctors' subjective demand for the use of efficient and content-standardized ultrasound report templates. The differences in the results of ultrasound doctors' responses at different levels of hospitals were compared using the R×C chi-square test.

A total of 3863 valid responses were collected from ultrasound doctors at all levels in 31 provincial-level hospitals in China, excluding Hong Kong SAR, Macau SAR, and Taiwan. There were some differences in the response rate of the questionnaires in terms of geographical distribution, hospital level, and type of title. The highest response rates were found in North China, tertiary hospitals, and attending doctors, which were 30.44% (1176/3863), 53.46% (2065/3863), and 41.11% (1588/3863), respectively. There were 96 (2.49%, 96/3863) answers without ultrasound workstation or with ultrasound workstation but without report templates, and 3767 (97.51%, 3767/3863) answers with ultrasound workstation and report templates. In terms of efficiency in the use of ultrasound report templates, 43.40% (1635/3767) of ultrasound doctors gave feedback that they needed to use the mouse or keyboard for ≥4 steps to pull up the report template. The vast majority (93.05%, 3505/3767) of the respondents reported that they often or generally need to modify more text on the basis of the ultrasound report template when encountering positive cases. Regarding the comprehensiveness of templates for common conditions, 37.09% (1397/3767) had templates for almost all common conditions. For the reporting templates of common diseases, 35.07% (1321/3767) mostly had different templates for different severity levels. In terms of standardization of ultrasound report templates, regarding the survey on the comprehensiveness of the content description of the report template, only 16.11% (607/3767) of ultrasound doctors thought that the content description of the report template in their department was "very comprehensive", and based on the content described in the TI-RADS (Thyroid Ultrasound Imaging Reporting and Data System), only 22.40% (832/3715) of ultrasound doctors reported that every report was fully described. Regarding the survey on whether the terminology of the report templates is standardized, only 13.75% (518/3767) of the ultrasound doctors thought that the terminology of the report templates in their departments was "very standardized, and 56.78% (2139/3767) reported that their department's ultrasound report template contained words such as "light spot" and "light cluster". Among all respondents, the cumulative percentage of those who need a set of ultrasound report templates that is efficient in use and standardized in content was 98.52% (3806/3863). There were statistically significant differences in the responses to all questions by ultrasound doctors at different levels of hospitals (P＜0.01), and ultrasound report templates at tertiary hospitals were superior to those at other levels in terms of efficiency of use and degree of standardization.

The current ultrasound report templates in China have certain shortcomings in terms of efficiency and standardization. Most ultrasound doctors hope to have a set of efficient and standardized ultrasound report templates.