Head trauma

CT scan interpretation by radiology residents versus staff radiologists

Michael G. Wysoki, Carlos J. Nassar, Robert A. Koenigsberg, Robert A. Novelline, Scott Faro, Eric N. Faerber

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the rate and clinical outcome of discrepancies in interpretation by radiology residents and staff neuroradiologists of posttraumatic cranial computed tomographic (CT) scans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective evaluation was performed for 419 consecutive emergency posttraumatic cranial CT studies that had been interpreted by radiology residents on call over a 16-month period. Discrepancies between the interpretations made by residents and those made by staff radiologists were divided into two groups: failure to recognize an abnormality (false-negative finding) and interpretation of normal as abnormal (false-positive finding). Discrepancies were considered major if they could affect patient care in the emergency setting and minor if they could not. RESULTS: Major and minor discrepancies were 1.7% and 2.6%, respectively, among interpretations made by residents and those by staff radiologists. Major discrepancies were four subdural hematomas, one pneumocephalus, one hemorrhagic contusion, and one subarachnoid hemorrhage. Minor discrepancies included six skull and five facial fractures. The discrepancy rate was statistically significantly higher (12.2%) when CT findings were abnormal than when they were normal (1.5%). No change in treatment was attributed to the delay in diagnosis. CONCLUSION: A low discrepancy rate was found between interpretations made by radiology residents and those made by staff neuroradiologists of posttraumatic cranial CT scans. There were no adverse clinical outcomes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)125-128
Number of pages4
JournalRadiology
Volume208
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1998
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Craniocerebral Trauma
Radiology
Emergencies
Pneumocephalus
Subdural Hematoma
Contusions
Subarachnoid Hemorrhage
Skull
Patient Care
Radiologists
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • Brain, injuries 13.1211, 13.433
  • Diagnostic radiology
  • Education
  • Head, injuries, 10.1211, 10.41, 10.433
  • Images, interpretation, 13.1211
  • Observer performance 13.1211

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Wysoki, M. G., Nassar, C. J., Koenigsberg, R. A., Novelline, R. A., Faro, S., & Faerber, E. N. (1998). Head trauma: CT scan interpretation by radiology residents versus staff radiologists. Radiology, 208(1), 125-128. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.208.1.9646802

Head trauma : CT scan interpretation by radiology residents versus staff radiologists. / Wysoki, Michael G.; Nassar, Carlos J.; Koenigsberg, Robert A.; Novelline, Robert A.; Faro, Scott; Faerber, Eric N.

In: Radiology, Vol. 208, No. 1, 01.01.1998, p. 125-128.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Wysoki, MG, Nassar, CJ, Koenigsberg, RA, Novelline, RA, Faro, S & Faerber, EN 1998, 'Head trauma: CT scan interpretation by radiology residents versus staff radiologists', Radiology, vol. 208, no. 1, pp. 125-128. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.208.1.9646802
Wysoki, Michael G. ; Nassar, Carlos J. ; Koenigsberg, Robert A. ; Novelline, Robert A. ; Faro, Scott ; Faerber, Eric N. / Head trauma : CT scan interpretation by radiology residents versus staff radiologists. In: Radiology. 1998 ; Vol. 208, No. 1. pp. 125-128.
@article{12e420a7a3094b8f9292016f9fd39609,
title = "Head trauma: CT scan interpretation by radiology residents versus staff radiologists",
abstract = "PURPOSE: To determine the rate and clinical outcome of discrepancies in interpretation by radiology residents and staff neuroradiologists of posttraumatic cranial computed tomographic (CT) scans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective evaluation was performed for 419 consecutive emergency posttraumatic cranial CT studies that had been interpreted by radiology residents on call over a 16-month period. Discrepancies between the interpretations made by residents and those made by staff radiologists were divided into two groups: failure to recognize an abnormality (false-negative finding) and interpretation of normal as abnormal (false-positive finding). Discrepancies were considered major if they could affect patient care in the emergency setting and minor if they could not. RESULTS: Major and minor discrepancies were 1.7{\%} and 2.6{\%}, respectively, among interpretations made by residents and those by staff radiologists. Major discrepancies were four subdural hematomas, one pneumocephalus, one hemorrhagic contusion, and one subarachnoid hemorrhage. Minor discrepancies included six skull and five facial fractures. The discrepancy rate was statistically significantly higher (12.2{\%}) when CT findings were abnormal than when they were normal (1.5{\%}). No change in treatment was attributed to the delay in diagnosis. CONCLUSION: A low discrepancy rate was found between interpretations made by radiology residents and those made by staff neuroradiologists of posttraumatic cranial CT scans. There were no adverse clinical outcomes.",
keywords = "Brain, injuries 13.1211, 13.433, Diagnostic radiology, Education, Head, injuries, 10.1211, 10.41, 10.433, Images, interpretation, 13.1211, Observer performance 13.1211",
author = "Wysoki, {Michael G.} and Nassar, {Carlos J.} and Koenigsberg, {Robert A.} and Novelline, {Robert A.} and Scott Faro and Faerber, {Eric N.}",
year = "1998",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1148/radiology.208.1.9646802",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "208",
pages = "125--128",
journal = "Radiology",
issn = "0033-8419",
publisher = "Radiological Society of North America Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Head trauma

T2 - CT scan interpretation by radiology residents versus staff radiologists

AU - Wysoki, Michael G.

AU - Nassar, Carlos J.

AU - Koenigsberg, Robert A.

AU - Novelline, Robert A.

AU - Faro, Scott

AU - Faerber, Eric N.

PY - 1998/1/1

Y1 - 1998/1/1

N2 - PURPOSE: To determine the rate and clinical outcome of discrepancies in interpretation by radiology residents and staff neuroradiologists of posttraumatic cranial computed tomographic (CT) scans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective evaluation was performed for 419 consecutive emergency posttraumatic cranial CT studies that had been interpreted by radiology residents on call over a 16-month period. Discrepancies between the interpretations made by residents and those made by staff radiologists were divided into two groups: failure to recognize an abnormality (false-negative finding) and interpretation of normal as abnormal (false-positive finding). Discrepancies were considered major if they could affect patient care in the emergency setting and minor if they could not. RESULTS: Major and minor discrepancies were 1.7% and 2.6%, respectively, among interpretations made by residents and those by staff radiologists. Major discrepancies were four subdural hematomas, one pneumocephalus, one hemorrhagic contusion, and one subarachnoid hemorrhage. Minor discrepancies included six skull and five facial fractures. The discrepancy rate was statistically significantly higher (12.2%) when CT findings were abnormal than when they were normal (1.5%). No change in treatment was attributed to the delay in diagnosis. CONCLUSION: A low discrepancy rate was found between interpretations made by radiology residents and those made by staff neuroradiologists of posttraumatic cranial CT scans. There were no adverse clinical outcomes.

AB - PURPOSE: To determine the rate and clinical outcome of discrepancies in interpretation by radiology residents and staff neuroradiologists of posttraumatic cranial computed tomographic (CT) scans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective evaluation was performed for 419 consecutive emergency posttraumatic cranial CT studies that had been interpreted by radiology residents on call over a 16-month period. Discrepancies between the interpretations made by residents and those made by staff radiologists were divided into two groups: failure to recognize an abnormality (false-negative finding) and interpretation of normal as abnormal (false-positive finding). Discrepancies were considered major if they could affect patient care in the emergency setting and minor if they could not. RESULTS: Major and minor discrepancies were 1.7% and 2.6%, respectively, among interpretations made by residents and those by staff radiologists. Major discrepancies were four subdural hematomas, one pneumocephalus, one hemorrhagic contusion, and one subarachnoid hemorrhage. Minor discrepancies included six skull and five facial fractures. The discrepancy rate was statistically significantly higher (12.2%) when CT findings were abnormal than when they were normal (1.5%). No change in treatment was attributed to the delay in diagnosis. CONCLUSION: A low discrepancy rate was found between interpretations made by radiology residents and those made by staff neuroradiologists of posttraumatic cranial CT scans. There were no adverse clinical outcomes.

KW - Brain, injuries 13.1211, 13.433

KW - Diagnostic radiology

KW - Education

KW - Head, injuries, 10.1211, 10.41, 10.433

KW - Images, interpretation, 13.1211

KW - Observer performance 13.1211

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0031902891&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0031902891&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1148/radiology.208.1.9646802

DO - 10.1148/radiology.208.1.9646802

M3 - Article

VL - 208

SP - 125

EP - 128

JO - Radiology

JF - Radiology

SN - 0033-8419

IS - 1

ER -