Mukerji Nitin, Cahill Julian, Paluzzi Alessandro, Holliman Damian, Dambatta Shuaib, Kane Philip J
Department of Neurosurgery, James Cook University Hospital, Marton Road, Middlesbrough, UK.
Br J Neurosurg. 2009 Apr;23(2):158-61. doi: 10.1080/02688690902730723.
Neurosurgical registrars are frequently called upon by A&E staff and physicians to interpret emergency head CT (computed tomography) scans out of hours. This appears to reflect the reduced threshold for scanning patients and the nonavailability of a radiologist to report these scans. This study was undertaken to assess the safety of such practices. Five neurosurgical registrars, blinded to each other and to the radiology reports, interpreted 50 consecutive emergency head CT scans (both trauma and nontrauma) from the hospital's imaging system as a pilot study. These were initially graded as normal or abnormal. Abnormal scans were assessed for the presence of an intracranial bleed, pneumocephalus, skull fractures, cerebral contusions, mass effect, midline shift, ischaemia or hydrocephalus. The agreement of the observers' recordings with the report issued or approved by a consultant radiologist was evaluated using SPSS Version 13.0. Four of the five registrars assessed a further 150 scans in a similar manner to complete the study. There was a good general agreement between the formal reports and the neurosurgical registrars' identification of normal scans (average Kappa 0.79). The radiology reports and the registrars also agreed well on the presence or absence of intracranial blood, contusions and pneumocephalus (Kappa value > 0.70). The agreement was poorer for ischaemia, mass lesions (other than intracranial haematomas), grey white differentiation, evidence of raised intracranial pressure and midline shift (Kappa < 0.5). Neurosurgical registrars compared well with radiologists when it came to assessing emergency head CT scans as normal or detecting a surgical lesion. The agreement was poorer on subtle abnormalities. The practice of neurosurgical registrars informally 'reporting' on emergency head CT scans cannot be recommended.
急诊医护人员和内科医生经常会在非工作时间请神经外科住院医师解读急诊头部计算机断层扫描(CT)结果。这似乎反映出对患者进行扫描的门槛降低,且没有放射科医生可对这些扫描结果进行报告。本研究旨在评估这种做法的安全性。作为一项试点研究,五名神经外科住院医师在彼此不知情且不知道放射学报告的情况下,对医院影像系统中连续的50例急诊头部CT扫描(包括创伤性和非创伤性)进行解读。这些扫描最初被分为正常或异常。对异常扫描评估是否存在颅内出血、气颅、颅骨骨折、脑挫伤、占位效应、中线移位、缺血或脑积水。使用SPSS 13.0版本评估观察者记录与放射科顾问医生出具或批准的报告之间的一致性。五名住院医师中的四名以类似方式评估了另外150例扫描以完成研究。正式报告与神经外科住院医师对正常扫描的识别之间总体一致性良好(平均Kappa值为0.79)。放射学报告与住院医师在颅内出血、挫伤和气颅的有无方面也有很好的一致性(Kappa值>0.70)。在缺血、占位性病变(颅内血肿除外)、灰白质区分、颅内压升高证据和中线移位方面一致性较差(Kappa<0.5)。在评估急诊头部CT扫描是否正常或检测手术病变方面,神经外科住院医师与放射科医生相比表现良好。在细微异常方面一致性较差。不建议神经外科住院医师对急诊头部CT扫描进行非正式“报告”的做法。