Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wechsler, R.
Right arrow Articles by Alexander, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wechsler, R.
Right arrow Articles by Alexander, A.

Radiology, Vol 199, 717-720, Copyright © 1996 by Radiological Society of North America


ARTICLES

Effects of training and experience in interpretation of emergency body CT scans

RJ Wechsler, CM Spettell, AB Kurtz, AS Lev-Toaff, EJ Halpern, LN Nazarian, RI Feld, L Needleman and AA Alexander
Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia PA 19107, USA.

PURPOSE: To determine the effects of level of training and other factors on the rate of discrepant interpretation of emergency body computed tomographic (CT) scans by trainees and staff radiologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five hundred ninety-eight consecutive emergency CT studies were prospectively interpreted by radiology residents or board-certified body imaging fellows over a 12-month period. Each interpretation was reviewed within 12 hours by an attending body CT radiologist. Major discrepancies between staff radiologists' and trainees' interpretations were defined and those with the potential to affect immediate patient therapy; minor discrepancies were defined ad those without such potential. The effects on discrepancy rates were examined for abnormal versus normal CT findings and trauma versus nontrauma cases. RESULTS: Major and minor discrepancy rates were 1.2% and 6.5%, respectively, between interpretations made by the trainee and the staff radiologist. Overall, fellows demonstrated statistically significantly lower discrepancy rates than did senior of junior residents (5.9%, 13.7%, and 13.3%, respectively). The discrepancy rate was higher when CT findings were abnormal than when they were normal (13.5% vs 2.6%). There were no differences between discrepancy rates for trauma and nontrauma cases. CONCLUSION: Experience appeared to decrease discrepancy rates. Trainees were more likely to miss findings than to read normal scans as abnormal.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
R. B. Ruchman, J. Jaeger, E. F. Wiggins III, S. Seinfeld, V. Thakral, S. Bolla, and S. Wallach
Preliminary Radiology Resident Interpretations Versus Final Attending Radiologist Interpretations and the Impact on Patient Care in a Community Hospital
Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2007; 189(3): 523 - 526.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
S. Haller, C. Kaiser, P. Buser, G. Bongartz, and J. Bremerich
Coronary artery imaging with contrast-enhanced MDCT: extracardiac findings.
Am. J. Roentgenol., July 1, 2006; 187(1): 105 - 110.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
C. Keyzer, M. Zalcman, V. De Maertelaer, E. Coppens, M.-A. Bali, P. A. Gevenois, and D. Van Gansbeke
Comparison of US and Unenhanced Multi-Detector Row CT in Patients Suspected of having Acute Appendicitis
Radiology, August 1, 2005; 236(2): 527 - 534.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
M. S. Ginsberg, V. King, and D. M. Panicek
Comparison of Interpretations of CT Angiograms in the Evaluation of Suspected Pulmonary Embolism by On-Call Radiology Fellows and Subsequently by Radiology Faculty
Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2004; 182(1): 61 - 66.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
E. Carney, J. Kempf, V. DeCarvalho, A. Yudd, and J. Nosher
Preliminary Interpretations of After-Hours CT and Sonography by Radiology Residents Versus Final Interpretations by Body Imaging Radiologists at a Level 1 Trauma Center
Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2003; 181(2): 367 - 373.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
L. Berlin
Potential Legal Ramifications of Whole-Body CT Screening: Taking a Peek into Pandora's Box
Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2003; 180(2): 317 - 322.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
L. S. Yoon, A. H. Haims, J. A. Brink, R. Rabinovici, and H. P. Forman
Evaluation of an Emergency Radiology Quality Assurance Program at a Level I Trauma Center: Abdominal and Pelvic CT Studies
Radiology, July 1, 2002; 224(1): 42 - 46.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


Home page
Am. J. Neuroradiol.Home page
W. K. Erly, W. G. Berger, E. Krupinski, J. F. Seeger, and J. A. Guisto
Radiology Resident Evaluation of Head CT Scan Orders in the Emergency Department
AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., January 1, 2002; 23(1): 103 - 107.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
B. S. Hertzberg, M. A. Kliewer, J. D. Bowie, B. A. Carroll, D. H. DeLong, L. Gray, and R. C. Nelson
Physician Training Requirements in Sonography: How Many Cases Are Needed for Competence?
Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2000; 174(5): 1221 - 1227.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Neuroradiol.Home page
N. R. Lal, U. M. Murray, O. P. Eldevik, and J. S. Desmond
Clinical Consequences of Misinterpretations of Neuroradiologic CT Scans by On-CallRadiology Residents
AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., January 1, 2000; 21(1): 124 - 129.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1996 by the Radiological Society of North America.