Henostroza German, Harris Jennifer B, Kancheya Nzali, Nhandu Venerandah, Besa Stable, Musopole Robert, Krüüner Annika, Chileshe Chisela, Dunn Ian J, Reid Stewart E
Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, USA.
Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.
BMC Infect Dis. 2016 Mar 23;16:136. doi: 10.1186/s12879-016-1460-z.
In Zambia the vast majority of chest radiographs (CXR) are read by clinical officers who have limited training and varied interpretation experience, meaning lower inter-rater reliability and limiting the usefulness of CXR as a diagnostic tool. In 2010-11, the Zambian Prison Service and Ministry of Health established TB and HIV screening programs in six prisons; screening included digital radiography for all participants. Using front-line clinicians we evaluated sensitivity, specificity and inter-rater agreement for digital CXR interpretation using the Chest Radiograph Reading and Recording System (CRRS).
Digital radiographs were selected from HIV-infected and uninfected inmates who participated in a TB and HIV screening program at two Zambian prisons. Two medical officers (MOs) and two clinical officers (COs) independently interpreted all CXRs. We calculated sensitivity and specificity of CXR interpretations compared to culture as the gold standard and evaluated inter-rater reliability using percent agreement and kappa coefficients.
571 CXRs were included in analyses. Sensitivity of the interpretation "any abnormality" ranged from 50-70 % depending on the reader and the patients' HIV status. In general, MO's had higher specificities than COs. Kappa coefficients for the ratings of "abnormalities consistent with TB" and "any abnormality" showed good agreement between MOs on HIV-uninfected CXRs and moderate agreement on HIV-infected CXRs whereas the COs demonstrated fair agreement in both categories, regardless of HIV status.
Sensitivity, specificity and inter-rater agreement varied substantially between readers with different experience and training, however the medical officers who underwent formal CRRS training had more consistent interpretations.
在赞比亚,绝大多数胸部X光片(CXR)由临床医务人员解读,他们所接受的培训有限且解读经验各异,这意味着评分者间信度较低,限制了CXR作为诊断工具的效用。2010年至2011年期间,赞比亚监狱管理局和卫生部在六所监狱设立了结核病和艾滋病毒筛查项目;筛查包括对所有参与者进行数字X光摄影。我们利用一线临床医生,采用胸部X光片阅读与记录系统(CRRS)评估了数字CXR解读的敏感性、特异性和评分者间一致性。
从参与赞比亚两所监狱结核病和艾滋病毒筛查项目的感染和未感染艾滋病毒的囚犯中选取数字X光片。两名医务人员(MO)和两名临床医务人员(CO)独立解读所有CXR。我们将CXR解读结果与作为金标准的培养结果相比较,计算其敏感性和特异性,并使用一致率和kappa系数评估评分者间信度。
571张CXR纳入分析。根据阅片者和患者的艾滋病毒感染状况,“任何异常”解读的敏感性在50%至70%之间。总体而言,MO的特异性高于CO。对于“与结核病相符的异常”和“任何异常”评级的kappa系数显示,在未感染艾滋病毒的CXR上,MO之间有良好的一致性,在感染艾滋病毒的CXR上有中等程度的一致性,而CO在这两类中均显示出一般的一致性,无论艾滋病毒感染状况如何。
不同经验和培训背景的阅片者之间,敏感性、特异性和评分者间一致性差异很大,然而接受过CRRS正式培训的医务人员解读结果更一致。