OATAO - Open Archive Toulouse Archive Ouverte Open Access Week

Double reading of outsourced CT/MR radiology reports

Vendrell, Jean-François and Frandon, Julien and Boussat, Bastien and Cotton, François and Ferretti, Gilbert and Sans, Nicolas and Tasu, Jean-Pierre and Beregi, Jean-Paul and Larbi, Ahmed Double reading of outsourced CT/MR radiology reports. (2018) Journal of Patient Safety. 1-5. ISSN 1549-8417

(Document in English)

PDF (Author's version) - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader

Official URL: https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000525


OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to determine disagreement rates in radiological reports provided by using a double-reading protocol in a national teleradiology company. METHODS: From January 2015 to July 2016, 134169 radiological exams from 36 French centers, benefited outsourced interpretations by certified radiologists, in both regular and after-hours activities. Of these, 2040 CT and MR-scans (1.5%) were subjected to a second opinion by other radiologists in the field of their anatomical specialty (cerebral, thoracic, abdominal-pelvic, and osteoarticular). A five-point agreement scale graded from 0 to 4 was assigned for each exam. Disagreements were considered as minor if no clinical consequence for patient (scores 1 and 2) and major if potential clinical consequence (score 3 and 4). Independent radiologists performed a retrospective analysis and a stratified statistical analysis. RESULTS: Double reading was performed on CT-scans (n = 934/2040, 45.8%) and MR-scans (n = 1106/2040, 54.2%) performed in regular (80.1%) and after-hours activities (19.9%). Disagreement scores occurred in 437 exams (21.4%), including major disagreements in 59 (2.9%). Among these, 48/754 were assigned by the thoracic second reader (6.4%), 6/70 by the abdominal-pelvic second reader (8.6%), 3/901 by the osteoarticular second reader (0.3%), and 2/315 by the cerebral second reader (0.6%), with statistical significant difference. No additional disagreement rate was observed in regular and after-hours activities (P = 0.63). CONCLUSIONS: Double-reading of outsourced CT and MRI interpretations yielded 21.4% disagreement rate, with potential clinical consequence for patient in 2,9% of the cases. These results are in accordance with those previously reported and suggests that quality assurance of outsourced interpretations is needed.

Item Type:Article
HAL Id:hal-02063156
Audience (journal):International peer-reviewed journal
Uncontrolled Keywords:
Institution:French research institutions > Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - CNRS (FRANCE)
Other partners > Institut National des Sciences Appliquées de Lyon - INSA (FRANCE)
French research institutions > Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale - INSERM (FRANCE)
Other partners > Université Grenoble Alpes - UGA (FRANCE)
Other partners > Université Claude Bernard-Lyon I - UCBL (FRANCE)
Other partners > Université Jean Monnet - St Etienne (FRANCE)
Other partners > Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Grenoble Alpes - CHU Grenoble Alpes (FRANCE)
Other partners > Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nîmes - CHU Nîmes (FRANCE)
Other partners > Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Poitiers - CHU Poitiers (FRANCE)
Other partners > Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse - CHU Toulouse (FRANCE)
Laboratory name:
Deposited On:10 Apr 2019 06:58

Repository Staff Only: item control page