Clinical impact of diagnostic imaging discrepancy by radiology trainees in an urban teaching hospital emergency department

被引:19
作者
Friedman S.M. [1 ]
Merman E. [1 ]
Chopra A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Emergency Medicine - University Health Network, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5G 2C4
关键词
Altered long-term outcome; Discrepant reporting; Emergency medicine; Morbidity; Mortality; Patient outcomes; Patient safety; Radiology;
D O I
10.1186/1865-1380-6-24
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Background: To characterize clinically significant diagnostic imaging (DI) discrepancies by radiology trainees and the impact on emergency department (ED) patients. Methods: Consecutive case series methodology over a 6-month period in an urban, tertiary care teaching hospital. Emergency physicians (EPs) were recruited to flag discrepant DI interpretations by radiology trainees that the EP deemed clinically significant. Cases were characterized using chart review and EP interview. Results: Twenty-eight discrepant reports were identified (representing 0.1% of 18,185 images interpreted). The mean time between provisional discrepant diagnosis (PDDx) and revised diagnosis (RDx) by attending radiology staff was 8.6 h (median 4.8 h, range 1.1-48.4), and 67.9% (n = 19) of the patients had left the ED by time of notification. The most frequently reported PDDx was CT abd/pelvis (32.1%, n = 9) and CT head (28.6%, n = 8). The impact of RDx was deemed major in 57.1% (n = 16) for reasons including altered admitting status (32.1%, n = 9), immediate subspecialty referral (n = 16, 57.1%), impact on management (25%, n = 7), and surgical management (21.4%, n = 6). EPs reported likely perceived impact of PDDx as resulting in increased pain (17. 9%, n = 5), morbidity (10.7%, n = 3), and prolonged hospitalization (25%, n = 7), but not altered long-term outcome or mortality. Conclusions: Relatively few clinically important discrepant reads were reported. Revised diagnosis (RDx) was associated with major clinical impact in 57.1% of reports, but few patients experienced increased morbidity, and none increased mortality. The importance of expedient communication of discrepant reports by staff radiologists is stressed, as is EP verification of patient contact information prior to discharge. © 2013 Friedman et al.; licensee Springer.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 19 条
[1]  
Stevens K.J., Griffiths K.L., Rosenberg J., Mahadevan S., Zatz L.M., Leung A.N., Discordance rates between preliminary and final radiology reports on cross-sectional imaging studies at a level 1 trauma center, Acad Radiol, 15, 10, pp. 1217-1226, (2008)
[2]  
Cooper V.F., Goodhartz L.A., Nemcek Jr.A.A., Ryu R.K., Radiology resident interpretations of on-call imaging studies: The incidence of major discrepancies, Acad Radiol, 15, 9, pp. 1198-1204, (2008)
[3]  
Maloney E., Lomasney L.M., Schomer L., Application of the RADPEER scoring language to interpretation discrepancies between diagnostic radiology residents and faculty radiologists, J Am Coll Radiol, 9, pp. 264-269, (2012)
[4]  
Ruutiainen A.T., Scanlon M.H., Itri J.N., Identifying benchmarks for discrepancy rates and preliminary interpretations provided by radiology trainees at an academic institution, J Am Coll Radiol, 8, 9, pp. 644-648, (2011)
[5]  
Blane C.E., Desmond J.S., Helvie M.A., Zink B.J., Bailey J.E., Yang L.D., Dunnick N.R., Academic Radiology and the Emergency Department:. Does It Need Changing?, Academic Radiology, 14, 5, pp. 625-630, (2007)
[6]  
Eng J., Mysko W.K., Weller G.E., Renard R., Gitlin J.N., Bluemke D.A., Magid D., Kelen G.D., Scott Jr.W.W., Interpretation of emergency department radiographs: The comparison of emergency medicine physician with radiologists, residents with faculty, and film with digital display, AJR Am J Roentgenol, 175, 5, pp. 1233-1238, (2000)
[7]  
Carney E., Kempf J., DeCarvalho V., Yudd A., Nosher J., Preliminary interpretations of after-hours CT and sonography by radiology residents versus final interpretations by body imaging radiologists at a level I trauma center, American Journal of Roentgenology, 181, 2, pp. 367-373, (2003)
[8]  
Lal N.R., Murray U.M., Petter Eldevik O., Desmond J.S., Clinical consequences of misinterpretations of neuroradiologic CT scans by on-call radiology residents, American Journal of Neuroradiology, 21, 1, pp. 124-129, (2000)
[9]  
Ruchman R.B., Jaeger J., Wiggins III E.F., Seinfeld S., Thakral V., Bolla S., Wallach S., Preliminary radiology resident interpretations versus final attending radiologist interpretations and the impact on patient care in a community hospital, American Journal of Roentgenology, 189, 3, pp. 523-526, (2007)
[10]  
Robinson P.J.A., Culpan G., Wiggins M., Interpretation of selected accident and emergency radiographic examinations by radiographers: A review of 11,000 cases, British Journal of Radiology, 72, pp. 546-551, (1999)