Scott W W, Rosenbaum J E, Ackerman S J, Reichle R L, Magid D, Weller J C, Gitlin J N
Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD 21287-8722.
Radiology. 1993 Jun;187(3):811-5. doi: 10.1148/radiology.187.3.8497636.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether radiologists perform equally well with plain radiographs or digitized images displayed on a video monitor in interpretation of difficult orthopedic trauma cases. Interpretations with film and those made from a teleradiology system with spatial resolution of 2.35 line pairs per millimeter were compared in 120 difficult cases, 60 with the selected abnormality (ie, fracture or dislocation) and 60 that were control cases. Seven senior radiology residents and one radiology fellow each interpreted 60 randomly ordered cases with the teleradiology system (1,280 x 1,024-pixel monitors) and 60 cases with the original radiographs. The overall accuracy of the readers was 80.6% for film interpretations and 59.6% for teleradiology screen readings (P < .001). Sensitivity was 78.5% for film and 48.8% for on-screen images (P < .001), and specificity was 83.2% for film and 72.3% for on-screen images (P < .025). Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed rejection of the null hypothesis in favor of film interpretation (P < .0049). It was concluded that the teleradiology system was not acceptable for primary diagnostic interpretation of difficult fracture cases.
本研究的目的是评估在解读复杂的骨科创伤病例时,放射科医生对普通X光片和视频监视器上显示的数字化图像的解读表现是否相同。在120例复杂病例中,比较了胶片解读结果与来自空间分辨率为每毫米2.35线对的远程放射学系统的解读结果,其中60例有选定的异常情况(即骨折或脱位),60例为对照病例。7名放射科高级住院医师和1名放射科专科住院医师每人对60例随机排序的病例进行解读,其中30例使用远程放射学系统(1280×1024像素监视器),30例使用原始X光片。读者对胶片解读的总体准确率为80.6%,对远程放射学屏幕解读的总体准确率为59.6%(P<.001)。胶片的敏感度为78.5%,屏幕图像的敏感度为48.8%(P<.001),胶片的特异度为83.2%,屏幕图像的特异度为72.3%(P<.025)。受试者工作特征分析显示,原假设被拒绝,支持胶片解读(P<.0049)。研究得出结论,远程放射学系统对于复杂骨折病例的初步诊断解读是不可接受的。