1
|
Zhou S, Hanna T, Ma T, Johnson TD, Lamoureux C, Weber S, Johnson JO, Steenburg SD, Dunkle JW, Chong ST. Daytime, evening, and overnight: the 24-h radiology cycle and impact on interpretative accuracy. Emerg Radiol 2023; 30:607-612. [PMID: 37518838 DOI: 10.1007/s10140-023-02161-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2022] [Accepted: 07/19/2023] [Indexed: 08/01/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To assess the influence of time of day when a study is interpreted on discrepancy rates for common and advanced studies performed in the acute community setting. METHODS This retrospective study used the databank of a U.S. teleradiology company to retrieve studies between 2012 and 2016 with a preliminary report followed by a final report by the on-site client hospital. Neuroradiology, abdominal radiology, and musculoskeletal radiology studies were included. Teleradiologists were fellowship trained in one of these subspecialty areas. Daytime, evening, and overnight times were defined. Associations between major and minor discrepancies, time of day, and whether the study was common or advanced were tested with significance set at p = .05. RESULTS A total of 5,883,980 studies were analyzed. There were 8444 major discrepancies (0.14%) and 17,208 minor discrepancies (0.29%). For common studies, daytime (0.13%) and evening (0.13%) had lower major discrepancy rates compared to overnight (0.14%) (daytime to overnight, RR = 0.57, 95%CI: 0.45, 0.72, p < 0.01 and evening to overnight, RR = 0.57, 95%CI: 0.49,0.67, p < 0.01). Minor discrepancy rates for common studies were decreased for evening (0.29%) compared to overnight (0.30%) (RR = 0.89, 95%CI: 0.80,0.99, p = 0.029). For advanced studies, daytime (.15%) had lower major discrepancy rates compared to evening (0.20%) and overnight (.23%) (daytime to evening, RR = 0.77, 95%CI: 0.61, 0.97, p = 0.028 and daytime to overnight, RR = 0.66, 95%CI: 0.50, 0.87, p ≤ 0.01). CONCLUSION Significantly higher major discrepancy rates for studies interpreted overnight suggest the need for radiologists to exercise greater caution when interpreting studies overnight and may require practice management strategies to help optimize overnight work conditions. The lower major discrepancy rates on advanced studies interpreted during the daytime suggest the need for reserving advanced studies for interpretation during the day when possible.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shannon Zhou
- Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Tarek Hanna
- Emergency and Trauma Imaging, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Tianwen Ma
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Timothy D Johnson
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | | | | | - Jamlik-Omari Johnson
- Keck School of Medicine, Department of Radiology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Scott D Steenburg
- Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Jeffrey W Dunkle
- Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Suzanne T Chong
- Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Utukuri PS, Shih RY, Ajam AA, Callahan KE, Chen D, Dunkle JW, Hunt CH, Ivanidze J, Ledbetter LN, Lee RK, Malu O, Pannell JS, Pollock JM, Potrebic SX, Setzen M, Shih RD, Soares BP, Staudt MD, Wang LL, Burns J. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Headache: 2022 Update. J Am Coll Radiol 2023; 20:S70-S93. [PMID: 37236753 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2023.02.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2023] [Accepted: 02/27/2023] [Indexed: 05/28/2023]
Abstract
Headache is an ancient problem plaguing a large proportion of the population. At present, headache disorders rank third among the global causes of disability, accounting for over $78 billion per year in direct and indirect costs in the United States. Given the prevalence of headache and the wide range of possible etiologies, the goal of this document is to help clarify the most appropriate initial imaging guidelines for headache for eight clinical scenarios/variants, which range from acute onset, life-threatening etiologies to chronic benign scenarios. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Robert Y Shih
- Panel Chair, Uniformed Services University, Bethesda, Maryland
| | | | - Kathryn E Callahan
- Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston Salem, North Carolina; American Geriatrics Society
| | - Doris Chen
- Stanford University, Stanford, California, Primary care physician
| | - Jeffrey W Dunkle
- Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana; Committee on Emergency Radiology-GSER
| | - Christopher H Hunt
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota; Commission on Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
| | | | | | - Ryan K Lee
- Einstein Healthcare Network, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Omojo Malu
- Fort Belvoir Community Hospital, Fort Belvoir, Virginia; American Academy of Family Physicians
| | | | | | - Sonja X Potrebic
- Southern California Permanente Medical Group, Pasadena, California; American Academy of Neurology
| | - Michael Setzen
- Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York; American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery
| | - Richard D Shih
- Schmidt College of Medicine, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, Florida; American College of Emergency Physicians
| | - Bruno P Soares
- The University of Vermont Medical Center, Burlington, Vermont
| | - Michael D Staudt
- Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Rochester, Michigan; American Association of Neurological Surgeons/Congress of Neurological Surgeons
| | - Lily L Wang
- University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio
| | - Judah Burns
- Specialty Chair, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Camacho MA, Dunkle JW, Mughli RA, Johnson JO, Stephen Ledbetter M, Nicolaou S, Sodickson AD, Chong ST, Berger FH. Starting an Emergency Radiology Division: Scheduling and Staffing, Compensation, and Equity and Parity. Radiol Clin North Am 2023; 61:111-118. [PMID: 36336384 DOI: 10.1016/j.rcl.2022.07.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
Establishing an emergency radiology division in a practice that has long-standing patterns of operational routines comes with both challenges and opportunities. In this article, considerations around scheduling and staffing, compensation, and equity and parity are provided with supporting literature references. Furthermore, a panel of experts having established, grown and managed emergency radiology divisions in North America and Europe share their experiences through a question and answer format.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marc A Camacho
- Departments of Radiology, University of South Florida Morsani College of Medicine and Florida State University College of Medicine, and Radiology Partners/Radiology Associates of Florida, 2700 University Square Drive, Tampa, FL 33612, USA
| | - Jeffrey W Dunkle
- Department of Radiology & Imaging Sciences, Indiana University School of Medicine and Indiana University Health, IUH University Hospital, 550 N. University Boulevard, Suite UH 0663, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA
| | - Rawan Abu Mughli
- Department of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Avenue, Room AG-58c, Toronto, Ontario M4N 3M5, Canada
| | - Jamlik-Omari Johnson
- Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, 500 Peachtree RD NE, Atlanta, GA 30308, USA
| | - M Stephen Ledbetter
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Mass General Brigham, Harvard Medical School. Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| | - Savvas Nicolaou
- Department of Radiology, Vancouver General Hospital, University of British Columbia, 899 West 12th Avenue, Vancouver, British Columbia V5Z 1M9, Canada
| | - Aaron D Sodickson
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Mass General Brigham, Harvard Medical School. Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| | - Suzanne T Chong
- Department of Radiology & Imaging Sciences, Indiana University School of Medicine and Indiana University Health, IUH University Hospital, 550 N. University Boulevard, Suite UH 0663, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA
| | - Ferco H Berger
- Department of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Avenue, Room AG-58c, Toronto, Ontario M4N 3M5, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Gichoya JW, Sinha P, Davis M, Dunkle JW, Hamlin SA, Herr KD, Hoff CN, Letter HP, McAdams CR, Puthoff GD, Smith KL, Steenburg SD, Banerjee I, Trivedi H. Multireader evaluation of radiologist performance for COVID-19 detection on emergency department chest radiographs. Clin Imaging 2021; 82:77-82. [PMID: 34798562 PMCID: PMC8585957 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2021.10.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/26/2021] [Revised: 10/20/2021] [Accepted: 10/26/2021] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Chest radiographs (CXR) are frequently used as a screening tool for patients with suspected COVID-19 infection pending reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) results, despite recommendations against this. We evaluated radiologist performance for COVID-19 diagnosis on CXR at the time of patient presentation in the Emergency Department (ED). MATERIALS AND METHODS We extracted RT-PCR results, clinical history, and CXRs of all patients from a single institution between March and June 2020. 984 RT-PCR positive and 1043 RT-PCR negative radiographs were reviewed by 10 emergency radiologists from 4 academic centers. 100 cases were read by all radiologists and 1927 cases by 2 radiologists. Each radiologist chose the single best label per case: Normal, COVID-19, Other - Infectious, Other - Noninfectious, Non-diagnostic, and Endotracheal Tube. Cases labeled with endotracheal tube (246) or non-diagnostic (54) were excluded. Remaining cases were analyzed for label distribution, clinical history, and inter-reader agreement. RESULTS 1727 radiographs (732 RT-PCR positive, 995 RT-PCR negative) were included from 1594 patients (51.2% male, 48.8% female, age 59 ± 19 years). For 89 cases read by all readers, there was poor agreement for RT-PCR positive (Fleiss Score 0.36) and negative (Fleiss Score 0.46) exams. Agreement between two readers on 1638 cases was 54.2% (373/688) for RT-PCR positive cases and 71.4% (679/950) for negative cases. Agreement was highest for RT-PCR negative cases labeled as Normal (50.4%, n = 479). Reader performance did not improve with clinical history or time between CXR and RT-PCR result. CONCLUSION At the time of presentation to the emergency department, emergency radiologist performance is non-specific for diagnosing COVID-19.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Judy W Gichoya
- Emory University, 1364 E Clifton Rd NE, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States of America
| | - Priyanshu Sinha
- Indiana University, 340 West 10th Street, Indianapolis, IN 46202-3082, United States of America.
| | - Melissa Davis
- Emory University, 1364 E Clifton Rd NE, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States of America
| | - Jeffrey W Dunkle
- Indiana University, 340 West 10th Street, Indianapolis, IN 46202-3082, United States of America
| | - Scott A Hamlin
- Emory University, 1364 E Clifton Rd NE, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States of America
| | - Keith D Herr
- Emory University, 1364 E Clifton Rd NE, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States of America
| | - Carrie N Hoff
- Emory University, 1364 E Clifton Rd NE, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States of America
| | - Haley P Letter
- University of Florida, Jacksonville, 655 West 8th Street, Jacksonville, FL 32209, United States of America
| | | | - Gregory D Puthoff
- Wake Forest University, 475 Vine Street, Winston-Salem, NC 27101, United States of America
| | - Kevin L Smith
- Indiana University, 340 West 10th Street, Indianapolis, IN 46202-3082, United States of America
| | - Scott D Steenburg
- Indiana University, 340 West 10th Street, Indianapolis, IN 46202-3082, United States of America
| | - Imon Banerjee
- Emory University, 1364 E Clifton Rd NE, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States of America
| | - Hari Trivedi
- Emory University, 1364 E Clifton Rd NE, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Shea L, Heitkamp DE, Dunkle JW, Gunderman RB. Educational Implications of Health Insurance Changes. Acad Radiol 2018; 25:260-261. [PMID: 29107456 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2017.09.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/12/2017] [Accepted: 09/13/2017] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Lindsey Shea
- Department of Radiology, Indiana University, 702 North Barnhill Drive, Room 1053, Indianapolis, IN 46202
| | - Darel E Heitkamp
- Department of Radiology, Indiana University, 702 North Barnhill Drive, Room 1053, Indianapolis, IN 46202
| | - Jeffrey W Dunkle
- Department of Radiology, Indiana University, 702 North Barnhill Drive, Room 1053, Indianapolis, IN 46202
| | - Richard B Gunderman
- Department of Radiology, Indiana University, 702 North Barnhill Drive, Room 1053, Indianapolis, IN 46202.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Chou HY, Steenburg SD, Dunkle JW, Gussick SD, Petersen MJ, Kohli MD, Shen C, Lin H. Streamlining emergent hand and wrist radiography with a modified four-view protocol. Emerg Radiol 2016; 23:333-8. [DOI: 10.1007/s10140-016-1405-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2016] [Accepted: 05/06/2016] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
|
7
|
Sandrasegaran K, Rydberg J, Akisik F, Hameed TA, Dunkle JW. Isotropic CT examination of abdomen and pelvis diagnostic quality of reformat. Acad Radiol 2006; 13:1338-43. [PMID: 17070451 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2006.04.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2006] [Revised: 04/21/2006] [Accepted: 04/21/2006] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES To evaluate the image quality of axial and coronal reformats obtained from isotropic resolution abdomino-pelvic computed tomography (CT) examinations. MATERIALS AND METHODS Thirty consecutive patients with intravenous contrast-enhanced abdomino-pelvic CT examinations (Brilliance 40, Philips Medical Systems, Cleveland, OH) were enrolled for the study. The raw data were reconstructed into two sets of source axial images: 0.9-mm slice widths with 0.45-mm reconstruction interval (isotropic resolution) and 4-mm slice widths with 3-mm reconstruction interval (anisotropic resolution: group A). Isotropic data set was reformatted into axial and coronal stacks (groups B and C, respectively) with 4-mm slice width and 3-mm interval. Three independent readers evaluated stacks A to C using a 3-point scale for resolution of hepatic vessels, edge sharpness of kidneys, respiratory motion artifact, reconstruction artifact, noise, and overall image quality. RESULTS There was no statistical difference among the groups A to C for vessel resolution, motion artifact, noise, and overall quality. The scores given to group C were significantly lower than those to groups A and B for reconstruction artifacts. There was no difference among groups A to C for overall impression of image quality. The interreader agreements were excellent for axial images (groups A and B) and moderate for coronal reformats. CONCLUSION Isotropic scanning of the abdomen and pelvis allows creation of reformats with similar image quality as similar thickness axial source images. These reformats are of sufficient quality to form the basis of clinical interpretation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kumaresan Sandrasegaran
- Department of Radiology, UH 0279, 550 N. University Boulevard, Indiana University School of Medicine, IN 46202, USA.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|