Literature DB >> 29501502

Discrepancies in Radiograph Interpretation Between Pediatric Radiologists and Pediatric Intensivists in the Pediatric or Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.

Adam Z Fink1, Terry L Levin2, Einat Blumfield1, Sheri L Nemerofsky3, Mark C Liszewski1, Kandi George3, Suhas Nafday3, Mark Shlomovich4, K Allen Eddington4, Eliza H Myers5, H Michael Ushay5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) and neonatal intensive care units (NICUs), patient management decisions are sometimes based on preliminary interpretations of radiographs by pediatric intensivists (PIs) before a formal interpretation by a pediatric radiologist (PR).
OBJECTIVE: To quantify and classify discrepancies in radiographic interpretation between PRs and PIs in the PICU and NICU.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This institutional review board-approved multi-institutional prospective study included three PRs and PIs at two PICUs and three NICUs. Interpretations of chest and abdominal radiographs by PIs and PRs were recorded on online forms and compared. Discrepancies in interpretations were classified as "miss," "misinterpretation," or "overcall." The discrepancies were also categorized as "actionable" or "nonactionable" based on extrapolation of the ACR actionable reporting work group's list of actionable findings.
RESULTS: In 960 radiographic interpretations, the total, nonactionable, and actionable discrepancy rates between PRs and PIs were 34.7%, 26.8%, and 7.9%, respectively. The most common actionable discrepancies were line or tube positions and identification and interpretation of parenchymal opacities in the lungs. Identification of air leaks in the PICU and differentiation of normal from abnormal bowel gas patterns in the NICU followed in frequency. Air leaks accounted for 1% of total discrepancies and 11% of actionable discrepancies. Most discrepancies were nonactionable and included retrocardiac atelectasis and mischaracterization of neonatal lung disease in the PICU and NICU, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Although the total discrepancy rate was high, most discrepancies were nonactionable. Actionable discrepancies were predominantly due to line and tube position, which should be an area of focused education.
Copyright © 2017 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  NICU; PICU; Radiograph interpretation; discrepancy; pediatric intensivist; pediatric radiologist

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29501502     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2017.12.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol        ISSN: 1546-1440            Impact factor:   5.532


  2 in total

1.  Diagnostic Errors in Pediatric Critical Care: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Christina L Cifra; Jason W Custer; Hardeep Singh; James C Fackler
Journal:  Pediatr Crit Care Med       Date:  2021-08-01       Impact factor: 3.971

2.  Prognostic relevance and inter-observer reliability of chest-imaging in pediatric ARDS: a pediatric acute respiratory distress incidence and epidemiology (PARDIE) study.

Authors:  Yolanda M López-Fernández; Lincoln S Smith; Joseph G Kohne; Jason P Weinman; Vicent Modesto-Alapont; Susana B Reyes-Dominguez; Alberto Medina; Byron E Piñeres-Olave; Natalie Mahieu; Margaret J Klein; Heidi R Flori; Philippe Jouvet; Robinder G Khemani
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2020-05-25       Impact factor: 17.440

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.