AJR Join ARRS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
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 Erly, W. K.
Right arrow Articles by Alcala, J. N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Erly, W. K.
Right arrow Articles by Alcala, J. N.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
AJR 2003; 180:1727-1730
© American Roentgen Ray Society


Evaluation of Emergency CT Scans of the Head: Is There a Community Standard?

William K. Erly1, Boyd C. Ashdown2, Richard W. Lucio, II3, Raymond F. Carmody1, Joachim F. Seeger1 and Jennifer N. Alcala1

1 Department of Radiology, The University of Arizona Health Sciences Center, 1501 N. Campbell Ave., Tucson, AZ 85724-5067.
2 Radiology Ltd., 3170 E. Ft. Lowell Rd., Tucson, AZ 85716.
3 Department of Radiology, St. Mary's Hospital, 1601 W. St. Mary's Rd., Tucson, AZ 85745.

OBJECTIVE. This study was designed to assess the accuracy of general radiologists in the interpretation via teleradiology of emergency CT scans of the head.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. We studied the interpretations of 716 consecutive emergency CT scans of the head by a group of 15 board-certified general radiologists practicing in the community (as opposed to an academic setting). The scans were sent via teleradiology, and the preliminary interpretations were made. Three of the general radiologists were functioning as nighthawks, and the remaining 12 were acting as on-call radiologists in addition to their normal daytime duties. Each CT examination was interpreted by one of five neuroradiologists the day after the initial interpretation had been performed. The findings of the final interpretation and the preliminary interpretation were categorized as showing agreement, insignificant disagreement, or significant disagreement. The reports in the two categories indicating disagreement were reviewed and reclassified by a consensus of three university-based neuroradiologists.

RESULTS. Agreement between the initial interpretation by the general radiologist and the final interpretation by the neuroradiologist was found in 95% of the CT scans. The interpretations were judged to show insignificant disagreement in 3% (23/716) of the scans and to show significant disagreement in 2% (16/716). Of the 16 significant errors, five were false-positive findings and 11 were false-negative findings. Forty-seven CT scans depicted significant or active disease, and in 11 (23%) of these scans, the final report differed significantly from the preliminary interpretation. Three patients had pituitary masses, none of which had been described on the preliminary interpretation.

CONCLUSION. The rate of significant discordance between board-certified on-call general radiologists and neuroradiologists in the interpretation of emergency CT scans was 2%, which was comparable to previously published reports of residents' performance. The pituitary gland may be a blind spot, and additional attention should be focused on this area.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Neuroradiol.Home page
W.M. Strub, J.L. Leach, T. Tomsick, and A. Vagal
Overnight Preliminary Head CT Interpretations Provided by Residents: Locations of Misidentified Intracranial Hemorrhage
AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., October 1, 2007; 28(9): 1679 - 1682.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
PediatricsHome page
K. A. Campbell, R. P. Berger, L. Ettaro, and M. S. Roberts
Cost-effectiveness of Head Computed Tomography in Infants With Possible Inflicted Traumatic Brain Injury
Pediatrics, August 1, 2007; 120(2): 295 - 304.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Neuroradiol.Home page
R.D. Zimmerman, J.A. Maldjian, N.C. Brun, B. Horvath, and B.E. Skolnick
Radiologic Estimation of Hematoma Volume in Intracerebral Hemorrhage Trial by CT Scan
AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., March 1, 2006; 27(3): 666 - 670.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
M. T. Zivian, R. Gershater, W. K. Erly, B. C. Ashdown, and R. W. Lucio
General Radiologists' Diagnostic Accuracy: Incomplete Presentation of Data Casts Doubt on Study's Conclusions
Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2005; 184(2): 697 - 699.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
A. Kalyanpur, V. P. Neklesa, D. T. Pham, H. P. Forman, S. T. Stein, and J. A. Brink
Implementation of an International Teleradiology Staffing Model
Radiology, August 1, 2004; 232(2): 415 - 419.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JWatch Emergency Med.Home page
Emergency Head CT Scans: How Good Are Readings in the Middle of the Night?
Journal Watch Emergency Medicine, July 30, 2003; 2003(730): 5 - 5.
[Full Text]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2003 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.