Imaging Interpretation Is a Workflow Problem, Not Just a Clinical One

We treat imaging as a diagnostic event, but it's actually a workflow bottleneck.

Who reads it, when they read it, what they compare it to, and how findings get communicated to the patient — each step introduces friction and potential error that has nothing to do with the scan itself.

Consider the typical flow: a patient gets an MRI. The radiologist reads it and generates a report. The referring physician sees the report and sends the patient to a surgeon. The surgeon pulls up the images, reads them independently, and forms a clinical impression that may or may not align with the radiology report. Meanwhile, the patient has already read the report in their portal and arrived with a mix of anxiety and misunderstanding.

Every handoff in that chain is a potential failure point — not because anyone is incompetent, but because the system isn't designed for the complexity of the information being transferred. We've built workflows around reports, not around understanding.

The fix isn't better AI reading scans. It's better systems for how imaging findings travel from acquisition to clinical decision. That's a workflow problem, and it deserves workflow solutions.