TY - JOUR
T1 - Radiologist and Sonographer Interpretation Discrepancies for Biliary Sonographic Findings
T2 - Our Experience
AU - Dawkins, Adrian
AU - George, Nanditha
AU - Ganesh, Halemane
AU - Ayoob, Andres
AU - Lee, James
AU - Nair, Rashmi
AU - Kiper, Cassie
AU - Duncan, Kevin
AU - Stevens, Scott
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2017/12/1
Y1 - 2017/12/1
N2 - Purpose The aim was to determine the discrepancy rate between the preliminary interpretation by sonographers and the final radiology interpretation for biliary sonographic findings. Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval was obtained. Four hundred consecutive right upper quadrant sonographer performed ultrasounds were reviewed retrospectively. Sonographers' worksheets were compared with the final radiology report. For the purposes of this project, only the biliary findings were compared and reviewed. Discrepant findings were reviewed by 5 ultrasound experts, and a majority vote sought to determine truth, sonographer worksheet findings, or radiologist report. The clinical impact of the discrepant findings was also evaluated. Results Of the 400 scans, there were 338 agreements and 62 discrepancies. The overall discrepancy rate was 15.5%. The most frequently contested discrepancy was the presence or absence of pericholecystic fluid n = 21. Sonographers (S) were deemed correct 8 times and radiologists (R) 13 times, denoted 8/13 (S/R). The overall split was 30/32 (S/R) with radiologists deemed correct 52% of the time and sonographers 48% of the time. Using a 1-sample proportion χ2 test with Yates' continuity correction, there were no statistically significant discrepancies between the 2 groups. Conclusions We observed an interpretation discrepancy rate of 15.5% with radiologists deemed correct slightly more frequently, although this did not meet statistical significance. Clinically impactful discrepant findings (6.5% of all discrepancies) were all correctly called by the radiologists. Both groups bring tremendous value to the ultrasound arena, and continued collaboration should be encouraged. Purpose The aim of this study was to determine the discrepancy rate that exists between the preliminary interpretation by sonographers and the subsequent final radiology interpretation for biliary sonographic findings.
AB - Purpose The aim was to determine the discrepancy rate between the preliminary interpretation by sonographers and the final radiology interpretation for biliary sonographic findings. Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval was obtained. Four hundred consecutive right upper quadrant sonographer performed ultrasounds were reviewed retrospectively. Sonographers' worksheets were compared with the final radiology report. For the purposes of this project, only the biliary findings were compared and reviewed. Discrepant findings were reviewed by 5 ultrasound experts, and a majority vote sought to determine truth, sonographer worksheet findings, or radiologist report. The clinical impact of the discrepant findings was also evaluated. Results Of the 400 scans, there were 338 agreements and 62 discrepancies. The overall discrepancy rate was 15.5%. The most frequently contested discrepancy was the presence or absence of pericholecystic fluid n = 21. Sonographers (S) were deemed correct 8 times and radiologists (R) 13 times, denoted 8/13 (S/R). The overall split was 30/32 (S/R) with radiologists deemed correct 52% of the time and sonographers 48% of the time. Using a 1-sample proportion χ2 test with Yates' continuity correction, there were no statistically significant discrepancies between the 2 groups. Conclusions We observed an interpretation discrepancy rate of 15.5% with radiologists deemed correct slightly more frequently, although this did not meet statistical significance. Clinically impactful discrepant findings (6.5% of all discrepancies) were all correctly called by the radiologists. Both groups bring tremendous value to the ultrasound arena, and continued collaboration should be encouraged. Purpose The aim of this study was to determine the discrepancy rate that exists between the preliminary interpretation by sonographers and the subsequent final radiology interpretation for biliary sonographic findings.
KW - biliary
KW - discrepancy
KW - hands-on
KW - pericholecystic fluid
KW - radiologist
KW - sonographer
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85017443551
UR - https://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85017443551&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/RUQ.0000000000000280
DO - 10.1097/RUQ.0000000000000280
M3 - Article
C2 - 28399070
AN - SCOPUS:85017443551
SN - 0894-8771
VL - 33
SP - 261
EP - 264
JO - Ultrasound Quarterly
JF - Ultrasound Quarterly
IS - 4
ER -