Society for Academic Emergency Medicine Annual Meeting. Denver, CO, USA, 1996/05.
To determine whether radiologists'review of radiographs is unwarranted when emergency physicians are confident in their interpretations.
This was a prospective, descriptive study.
Treating emergency physicians at a high-volume, urban teaching hospital and a moderate-volume nonteaching hospital indicated their confidence or lack of confidence in their plain-film radiographic study interpretations.
All radiographs were then reviewed by radiologists according to the preexisting practice of each hospital.
A total of 16,410 emergency department radiographic studies were included, comprising consecutive patients at each hospital.
Charts of all discordant readings in the confident group were reviewed and judged clinically significant if treatment was altered.
Charges for radiologic review of the confident ED interpretations were calculated.
The ED physicians were confident in 9,599 sets of radiographs out of a total of 16,410 (58%). Discordant interpretation rates for the « confident » and « not confident » groups were 1.2% and 3.1%, respectively (difference, 1.9% ; 95% confidence interval [Cl] of the difference, 1.44% to 2.36%). Review of the 118 discordant interpretations in the confident group demonstrated that 11 were significant.
Few management changes were made as a result of radiologists'review of these radiographs.
Total radiology review charges for the confident group were $215,338. (...)
Mots-clés Pascal : Médecin, Urgence, Radiologue, Radiographie, Révision, Discordance, Décision, Etude comparative, Interprétation image, Homme, Agent santé, Radiodiagnostic
Mots-clés Pascal anglais : Physician, Emergency, Radiologist, Radiography, Revision, Discordance, Decision, Comparative study, Image interpretation, Human, Health worker, Radiodiagnosis
Notice produite par :
Inist-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique
Cote : 98-0144376
Code Inist : 002B30A05. Création : 21/07/1998.