Jack Kinnersly, Furqan Ahmed, Chris Selman, Elyssia M Bourke
{"title":"Skeletal radiograph interpretation discrepancies in the emergency department setting: A retrospective chart review.","authors":"Jack Kinnersly, Furqan Ahmed, Chris Selman, Elyssia M Bourke","doi":"10.1111/1742-6723.14539","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine the frequency and clinical consequences of discrepancies in skeletal radiograph interpretation between emergency and radiology doctors in an Australian ED.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We reviewed the records of adult and paediatric patients assessed with skeletal radiography in an ED in Victoria, Australia over 3 months (January to March 2022). Epidemiological data, the interpretation of the radiograph by ED and radiology doctors, and clinical management of the patient were recorded to determine interpretation discrepancies and the consequences of these.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 2359 unique skeletal radiographs in 1576 patient presentations during the study period. Of these, 140 (6%) had a discrepancy. Where a discrepancy existed, 47% of the ED interpretation reported a fracture and/or dislocation which was not present in the radiology interpretation (false positive), whereas the remaining (53%) were attributed to a missed fracture and/or dislocation (false negative). Thirty-five discrepancies (2%) required a change in patient management and were therefore clinically significant. The most commonly affected body region was the elbow, where 15% of radiographs were discrepant. Pathology was more often missed when multiple abnormalities were present on the same radiograph (odds ratio = 4.2, 95% confidence interval = 2.5-6.8).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The rate of clinically significant discrepancies in the interpretation of skeletal radiographs by emergency medicine doctors is low. This data support using the ED interpretation of radiographs to guide initial management as safe practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":11604,"journal":{"name":"Emergency Medicine Australasia","volume":" ","pages":"e14539"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Emergency Medicine Australasia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1742-6723.14539","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: To determine the frequency and clinical consequences of discrepancies in skeletal radiograph interpretation between emergency and radiology doctors in an Australian ED.
Methods: We reviewed the records of adult and paediatric patients assessed with skeletal radiography in an ED in Victoria, Australia over 3 months (January to March 2022). Epidemiological data, the interpretation of the radiograph by ED and radiology doctors, and clinical management of the patient were recorded to determine interpretation discrepancies and the consequences of these.
Results: There were 2359 unique skeletal radiographs in 1576 patient presentations during the study period. Of these, 140 (6%) had a discrepancy. Where a discrepancy existed, 47% of the ED interpretation reported a fracture and/or dislocation which was not present in the radiology interpretation (false positive), whereas the remaining (53%) were attributed to a missed fracture and/or dislocation (false negative). Thirty-five discrepancies (2%) required a change in patient management and were therefore clinically significant. The most commonly affected body region was the elbow, where 15% of radiographs were discrepant. Pathology was more often missed when multiple abnormalities were present on the same radiograph (odds ratio = 4.2, 95% confidence interval = 2.5-6.8).
Conclusion: The rate of clinically significant discrepancies in the interpretation of skeletal radiographs by emergency medicine doctors is low. This data support using the ED interpretation of radiographs to guide initial management as safe practice.
期刊介绍:
Emergency Medicine Australasia is the official journal of the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine (ACEM) and the Australasian Society for Emergency Medicine (ASEM), and publishes original articles dealing with all aspects of clinical practice, research, education and experiences in emergency medicine.
Original articles are published under the following sections: Original Research, Paediatric Emergency Medicine, Disaster Medicine, Education and Training, Ethics, International Emergency Medicine, Management and Quality, Medicolegal Matters, Prehospital Care, Public Health, Rural and Remote Care, Technology, Toxicology and Trauma. Accepted papers become the copyright of the journal.