title: Accuracy of chest radiograph interpretation by emergency physicians.
abstract: Chest radiographs are one of the most complex imaging modalities to interpret. The objective of this study was to assess how accurately emergency physicians interpreted chest radiographs in relation to radiologist reports. Radiological descriptions of chest radiographs from 667 emergency department (ED) patients, aged 14 to 84 years, were retrospectively reviewed. The overall level of agreement and agreement for different categories (congestive heart failure, pneumonia, and other) were assessed in 312 cases for which reports were available. Statistical analysis was done using the chi-square test, and interobserver agreement was calculated. The proportion of agreement between emergency physician and radiologist reports for normal, congestive heart failure, and pneumonia cases was 84.3%, 41.4%, and 41.4%, respectively. Emergency department physicians frequently missed specific radiographic abnormalities, and there was considerable discrepancy between their interpretations and those of trained radiologists. The agreement for some diagnostic categories such as pneumonia and congestive heart failure was low. This study's findings emphasize the need for improving interpretive skills among ED physicians.
authors.affiliation: Department of Emergency Medicine, King Khalid University Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. zohairalaseri@yahoo.com
authors.forename: Zohair
authors.initials: Z
authors.lastname: Al aseri
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D002170:Canada; D002983:Clinical Competence; D004635:Emergency Medicine / Q000592:standards*; D004636:Emergency Service, Hospital; D005260:Female; D006333:Heart Failure / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D010820:Physicians; D011014:Pneumonia / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D013902:Radiography, Thoracic / Q000592:standards*; D012189:Retrospective Studies
references.citation: World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser. 1972;492:1-56
references.pmid: 4626075
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 1982 Feb 11;306(6):333-9
references.pmid: 7054709
references.citation: Br J Radiol. 1977 May;50(593):299-301
references.pmid: 861448
references.citation: Ann Emerg Med. 1998 Feb;31(2):202-7
references.pmid: 9472181
references.citation: Am J Emerg Med. 1998 Mar;16(2):160-2
references.pmid: 9517693
references.citation: Proc R Soc Med. 1976 Oct;69(10):755-6
references.pmid: 995924
references.citation: Br Med J. 1979 Jun 16;1(6178):1597-8
references.pmid: 111756
references.citation: Am J Emerg Med. 1996 Jul;14(4):346-8
references.pmid: 8768151
references.citation: Ann Emerg Med. 1989 Aug;18(8):826-30
references.pmid: 2667408
references.citation: Ann Saudi Med. 1996 Nov;16(6):629-32
references.pmid: 17429238
references.citation: BMJ. 2000 Mar 18;320(7237):737-40
references.pmid: 10720354
references.citation: Proc R Soc Med. 1976 Oct;69(10):758-9
references.pmid: 995926
references.citation: Br Med J. 1979 Jun 16;1(6178):1595-7
references.pmid: 466139
references.citation: Br Med J. 1977 Aug 20;2(6085):479-80
references.pmid: 890357
references.citation: Emerg Radiol. 2005 Jun;11(4):242-6
references.pmid: 16133615
references.citation: Radiology. 1976 Aug;120(2):443-8
references.pmid: 778913