Storjohann Svea, Kirsch Michael, Rosenberg Britta, Rosenberg Christian, Lange Sandra, Syperek Annika, Schweikhard Frank Philipp, Hosten Norbert
Department of Radiology, Universitätsmedizin Greifswald, 17475 Greifswald, Germany.
Healthcare (Basel). 2021 Apr 1;9(4):405. doi: 10.3390/healthcare9040405.
(1) Background: We aimed to compare the accuracy of after-hours CT reports created in a traditional in-house setting versus a teleradiology setting by assessing the discrepancy rates between preliminary and final reports. (2) Methods: We conducted a prospective study to determine the number and severity of discrepancies between preliminary and final reports for 7761 consecutive after-hours CT scans collected over a 21-month period. CT exams were performed during on-call hours and were proofread by an attending the next day. Discrepancies between preliminary and gold-standard reports were evaluated by two senior attending radiologists, and differences in rates were assessed for statistical significance. (3) Results: A total of 7209 reports were included in the analysis. Discrepancies occurred in 1215/7209 cases (17%). Among these, 433/7209 reports (6%) showed clinically important differences between the preliminary and final reports. A total of 335/5509 of them were in-house reports (6.1%), and 98/1700 were teleradiology reports (5.8%). The relative frequencies of report changes were not significantly higher in teleradiology. (4) Conclusions: The accuracy of teleradiology reports was not inferior to that of in-house reports, with very similar clinically important differences rates found in both reporting situations.
(1) 背景:我们旨在通过评估初步报告与最终报告之间的差异率,比较在传统内部环境与远程放射学环境中生成的非工作时间CT报告的准确性。(2) 方法:我们进行了一项前瞻性研究,以确定在21个月期间收集的7761例连续非工作时间CT扫描的初步报告与最终报告之间差异的数量和严重程度。CT检查在值班时间进行,第二天由主治医生校对。由两名资深主治放射科医生评估初步报告与金标准报告之间的差异,并评估差异率的差异是否具有统计学意义。(3) 结果:分析共纳入7209份报告。1215/7209例(17%)出现差异。其中,433/7209份报告(6%)显示初步报告与最终报告之间存在临床重要差异。其中,335/5509份为内部报告(6.1%),98/1700份为远程放射学报告(5.8%)。远程放射学报告中报告更改的相对频率没有显著更高。(4) 结论:远程放射学报告的准确性不低于内部报告,在两种报告情况下发现的临床重要差异率非常相似。