Are accident and emergency consultants as accurate as consultant radiologists in interpreting plain skeletal radiographs taken at a minor injury unit?
The objective of this study was to compare the accuracy of an accident and emergency (A&E) consultant in interpreting plain skeletal radiographs with that of a consultant radiologist (CR). It took the form of a retrospective study of 2133 radiographs taken in a Minor Injury Unit (MIU). A&E consultant reports on these films were compared with those of a CR and also with a gold standard. The A&E consultant diagnoses achieved an accuracy of 98.5% (CR 97.8%), sensitivity of 97.8% (CR 98.1%), specificity of 98.8% (CR 97.7%), positive predictive value of 97.3% (CR 95.1%) and negative predictive value of 98.97% (CR 99.07%) (gold standard of 100%). In conclusion, the A&E consultant reports of plain skeletal radiographs generated from an MIU were as accurate as those of a consultant radiologist. This could have significant implications for the wet reporting of A&E departmental radiographs.
Tachakra
S
S
Accident and Emergency Department, Central Middlesex Hospital, Acton Lane, London NW10 7NS, UK.
Mukherjee
P
P
Smith
C
C
Dutton
D
D
D000059:Accidents; D001842:Bone and Bones / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D016001:Confidence Intervals; D003253:Consultants; D004636:Emergency Service, Hospital; D006801:Humans; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D011859:Radiography; D011871:Radiology / Q000592:standards*; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D006113:United Kingdom