Radiology Department, Colchester Hospital, Turner Road, Colchester CO4 5JL, UK.
Faculty of Medicine, Health and Social Care, Canterbury Christ Church University, North Holmes Road, Canterbury CT1 1QU, UK.
Radiography (Lond). 2022 May;28(2):312-318. doi: 10.1016/j.radi.2021.12.010. Epub 2022 Jan 7.
Error in interpretation of trauma radiographs by referrers is a problem which has detrimental effects on the patient and causes unnecessary repeat attendances. Radiographers can reduce errors by offering their opinion at the time of imaging. The Society and College of Radiographers have a longstanding recommendation that Red Dot (RD) schemes should be replaced by Preliminary Clinical Evaluation (PCE). The purpose of the study was to evaluate radiographer interpretation of skeletal trauma radiographs in clinical practice, determine if there was any difference in ability to interpret appendicular and axial studies, and evaluate appropriateness of PCE implementation.
A convenience sample of 23 self-selecting radiographers provided RD and PCE on 762 examinations. Each case was compared against the verified report and assigned a true negative/positive or false negative/positive value. Accuracy, sensitivity and specificity were calculated and performance measures between RD versus PCE, and appendicular versus axial were compared using Two-sample Z-Tests. Error analysis was performed and inter-observer consistency determined.
Overall RD and PCE accuracy, sensitivity and specificity for the study were 90%, 72% and 97% (RD), and 92%, 80% and 97% (PCE) respectively. Significant difference was demonstrated for sensitivity with PCE more sensitive than RD (p-value 0.03) and appendicular more sensitive than axial (RD p-value <0.02, PCE p-value <0.0001). Most errors were false negatives. Inter-observer consistency was evaluated by review of 128 cases and no difference between reviewers was established.
Radiographers without specific training were able to provide RD and PCE to a high standard. Radiographers interpreted positive findings more accurately using PCE than RD, and positive findings on appendicular cases were interpreted more accurately than those on axial cases.
This study supports local PCE implementation, contributes to the wider evidence base to justify transition towards PCE and identifies the necessity for local axial image interpretation training.
转诊医生对创伤 X 光片解读错误会对患者造成不利影响,并导致不必要的重复就诊。放射技师在成像时提供意见可以减少错误。放射技师学会和放射技师学院长期以来一直建议用初步临床评估(PCE)取代红点(RD)方案。本研究的目的是评估放射技师在临床实践中对骨骼创伤 X 光片的解读能力,确定在解读四肢和轴向研究方面是否存在能力差异,并评估 PCE 实施的适宜性。
23 名自行选择的放射技师作为便利样本,对 762 次检查进行 RD 和 PCE 检查。将每个病例与核实报告进行比较,并分配真阴性/阳性或假阴性/阳性值。计算准确性、敏感性和特异性,并使用双样本 Z 检验比较 RD 与 PCE 之间、四肢与轴向之间的性能指标。进行错误分析并确定观察者间的一致性。
该研究中 RD 和 PCE 的总体准确性、敏感性和特异性分别为 90%、72%和 97%(RD)和 92%、80%和 97%(PCE)。与 RD 相比,PCE 的敏感性更高(p 值<0.03),四肢的敏感性高于轴向(RD p 值<0.02,PCE p 值<0.0001),差异具有统计学意义。大多数错误是假阴性。通过对 128 例病例的回顾性评估,评估了观察者间的一致性,未发现观察者间的差异。
未经专门培训的放射技师能够达到提供 RD 和 PCE 的高标准。与 RD 相比,放射技师使用 PCE 更准确地解读阳性发现,并且对四肢病例的阳性发现的解读比对轴向病例的阳性发现更准确。
本研究支持当地 PCE 的实施,为向 PCE 过渡提供了更广泛的证据基础,并确定了当地轴向图像解读培训的必要性。