Review of outside studies by radiology residents: national survey of chief residents

COVID-19 Radiology Preparedness, Challenges & Opportunities: Responses From 18 Countries

PURPOSE

Radiology departments around the world have been faced with the challenge to adapt, and recover to the COVID-19 pandemic. This study is part of a worldwide survey of radiologists' responses to COVID-19 in 18 different countries in Africa, Asia, Europe, and Latin America. The purpose of this study is to analyze the changes made in international radiology departments and practices in response to the pandemic.

METHODS

The 18-item survey was sent via email from April to May 2020 to radiologists in Africa, Asia, Europe, and Latin America to assess their response to COVID-19. Our survey included questions regarding imaging, workforce adjustments, testing availability, staff and patient safety, research and education, and infrastructure availability.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight survey responses were reviewed. Of the 28 respondents, 42.9% have shortages of infrastructure and 78.6% responded that COVID-19 testing was available. Regarding the use of Chest CT in COVID-19 patients, 28.6% respondents used Chest CT as screening for COVID-19. For staff safety, interventions included encouraging use of masks in patient encounters, social distancing and PPE training. To cope with their education and research mission, radiology departments are doing online lectures, reducing the number of residents in rotations, and postponing any non-urgent activities.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, there are disparities in infrastructure, research, and educational initiatives during COVID-19 which also provides opportunity for the global radiology community to work together on these issues.

Accuracy and Clinical Utility of Reports from Outside Hospitals for CT of the Cervical Spine in Blunt Trauma

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Multidetector CT is the workhorse for detecting blunt cervical spine injury. There is no standard of care for re-interpretation of radiology images for patients with blunt trauma transferred to a higher level of care. The clinical impact of discrepancies of cervical spine CT reads remains unclear. We evaluated the discordance between primary (from referring hospitals) and secondary radiology interpretations (from a receiving level I tertiary trauma center) of cervical spine CT scans in patients with blunt trauma and assessed the clinical implications of missed cervical spine fractures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Medical records of patients with blunt trauma transferred to our institution between 2008 and 2015 were reviewed. Primary and secondary interpretations were compared and categorized as concordant and discordant. Two senior neuroradiologists adjudicated discordant reports. The benefit of re-interpretation was determined. For discordant cases, outcomes at discharge, injury severity pattern, treatment, and arrival in a cervical collar were assessed.

RESULTS

Six hundred fifty patients were included; 608 (94%) presented with concordant reports: 401 (61.7%) with fractures and 207 (31.8%) with no fractures. There were 42 (6.5%) discordant reports; 18 (2.8%) were cervical spine injuries undetected on the primary interpretation. Following adjudication, the secondary interpretation improved the sensitivity (99.3% versus 95.7%) and specificity (99.1% versus 91.7%) in detecting cervical spine fractures compared with the primary interpretation alone (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

There was an overall 6.5% discordance rate between primary and secondary interpretations of cervical spine CT scans. The secondary interpretation of the cervical spine CT increased the sensitivity and specificity of detecting cervical spine fractures in patients with blunt trauma transferred to higher-level care.