Evans Lachlan R, Fitzgerald Mark C, Mitra Biswadev, Varma Dinesh
National Trauma Research Institute, Monash Alfred Injury Network, Melbourne, Australia.
Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Postgrad Med J. 2017 Aug;93(1102):454-459. doi: 10.1136/postgradmedj-2016-134491. Epub 2016 Dec 23.
CT of the brain (CTB) is one of the most common radiological investigations performed in the emergency department (ED). Emergency clinicians rely upon this imaging modality to aid diagnosis and guide management. However, their capacity to accurately interpret CTB is unclear. This systematic review aims to determine this capacity and identify the potential need for interventions directed towards improving the ability of emergency clinicians in this important area.
A systematic review of the literature was conducted without date restrictions. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases and studies reporting the primary outcome of concordance of CTB interpretation between a non-radiologist and a radiology specialist were identified. Studies were assessed for heterogeneity and a subgroup analysis of pooled data based on medical specialty was carried out to specifically identify the concordance of ED clinicians. The quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE criteria.
There were 21 studies included in this review. Among the included studies, 12 reported on the concordance of emergency clinicians, 5 reported on radiology trainees and 4 on surgeons. Clinical and statistical heterogeneity between studies was high (I=97.8%, p<0.01). The concordance in the emergency subgroup was the lowest among all subgroups with a range of 0.63-0.95 and a clinically significant error rate ranging from 0.02 to 0.24.
Heterogeneity and the presence of bias limit our confidence in these findings. However, the variance in the interpretation of CTB between emergency clinicians and radiologists suggests that interventions towards improving accuracy may be useful.
脑部CT(CTB)是急诊科(ED)最常用的放射学检查之一。急诊临床医生依靠这种成像方式辅助诊断并指导治疗。然而,他们准确解读CTB的能力尚不清楚。本系统评价旨在确定这种能力,并确定在这一重要领域是否有必要采取干预措施来提高急诊临床医生的能力。
对文献进行无日期限制的系统评价。我们检索了MEDLINE、EMBASE和Cochrane数据库,确定了报告非放射科医生和放射科专家之间CTB解读一致性这一主要结果的研究。评估研究的异质性,并基于医学专业对汇总数据进行亚组分析,以具体确定急诊临床医生的一致性。使用GRADE标准评估证据质量。
本评价纳入了21项研究。在纳入的研究中,12项报告了急诊临床医生的一致性,5项报告了放射科住院医师的一致性,4项报告了外科医生的一致性。研究之间的临床和统计异质性较高(I=97.8%,p<0.01)。急诊亚组的一致性在所有亚组中最低,范围为0.63 - 0.95,临床显著错误率为0.02至0.24。
异质性和偏倚的存在限制了我们对这些结果的信心。然而,急诊临床医生和放射科医生在CTB解读上的差异表明,采取提高准确性的干预措施可能会有所帮助。