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


     

DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2493071543
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
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 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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Filippi, C. G.
Right arrow Articles by Ratkovits, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Filippi, C. G.
Right arrow Articles by Ratkovits, B.
(Radiology 2008;249:972-979.)
© RSNA, 2008

Neuroradiology

Discrepancy Rates of Radiology Resident Interpretations of On-Call Neuroradiology MR Imaging Studies1

Christopher G. Filippi, MD, Brett Schneider, BS, Heather N. Burbank, MD, Gary F. Alsofrom, MD, Grant Linnell, DO, and Bela Ratkovits, MD

1 From the Department of Radiology, Fletcher Allen Health Care–University of Vermont School of Medicine, 111 Colchester Ave, Burlington, VT 05401. Received August 31, 2007; revision requested November 16; revision received February 14, 2008; accepted April 7; final version accepted June 18. Address correspondence to C.G.F. (e-mail: christopher.filippi{at}vtmednet.org).

Purpose: To determine the discrepancy rates of radiology residents interpreting emergent neuroradiology magnetic resonance (MR) imaging studies and to assess any adverse clinical outcomes.

Materials and Methods: Three hundred sixty-one brain and spine MR imaging and MR angiographic examinations that were ordered emergently after hours and given preliminary interpretations by radiology residents were retrospectively reviewed from December 1, 2006 to May 31, 2007 with institutional review board approval. Discrepancies between the interpretations of radiology residents and the final reports of attending neuroradiologists were classified as either false-negative (FN, failure to recognize abnormalities) or false-positive (FP, misinterpreting normal images as abnormal). Discrepancies that could affect patient care or clinical outcome were considered major.

Results: Overall, the agreement rate was 92.8%, the overall discrepancy rate was 7.2%, the major disagreement rate was 4.2%, and the minor disagreement rate was 2.2%. Misinterpretations among 1st-year residents on call were significant (P < .04) when compared with more senior-level residents. There were 23 FN interpretations. The most common misses were acute stroke (n = 3), aneurysm (n = 3), vascular occlusion (n = 3), and disk herniation (n = 2). There were only three FP interpretations (misdiagnoses of syrinx, arachnoiditis, and acute infarct).

Conclusion: There was no adverse clinical outcome as a result of misinterpretations, owing in part to rapid turnaround time for final reporting. Level of residency training has a significant effect on the rate of discrepancy, which may be mitigated by recent changes regarding 1st-year radiology residents' overnight call.

© RSNA, 2008