Accuracy of after‐hours trauma cervical spine CT reporting by radiology trainees: Experiences from two Australian teaching hospitals. Issue 5 (19th September 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Woodford, Richard M; Green, Lorne; Koo, Kendrick; Williams, Cassandra; Tran, Phillip V
• Is Part Of: Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology. Volume 66:Issue 5(2022)
• Page Start: 628
• Page End: 633
• Publication Date: 2021-09-19
• Subjects: accuracy -- cervical -- CT -- discrepancy -- trainee; Radiology, Medical -- Periodicals; Radiology, Medical -- Australasia -- Periodicals; 616.0757
• DOI: 10.1111/1754-9485.13334
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1754-9477

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: Like many teaching hospitals in Australia, after‐hours computed tomography (CT) reporting at our institution is undertaken by the on‐call radiology registrar. The accuracy of these reports is important as management is often initiated based on the interim findings, prior to review by the consultant radiologist. A common exception to this approach is cervical CT (CCT), as many hospital protocols recommend patients to remain in spinal precautions until the report is finalised by a consultant, although there are very few studies to support this practice. Methods: The interim registrar reports for all CCTs performed after‐hours over a 12‐month period were retrospectively reviewed. The final consultant report was used as the gold standard to establish accuracy of the registrar report. The primary outcome was discrepancy between the provisional and final reports. Any discrepancy was classified as either an 'overcall' or 'miss'. Discrepancies were graded by the RADPEER scoring system. Results: A total of 1084 after‐hours CCT studies were reviewed. The number of cases positive for injury was 37 (3.4%). The total number of discrepancies was 14 (discrepancy rate 1.3%), including 4 overcalls (0.3%) and 10 misses (0.9%). The discrepancy rates for junior and senior registrars were 1.7% and 0.7% respectively. Only 5 misses (0.5%) were considered clinically significant. Conclusion: Registrars reporting after‐hours CCT have low rates of discrepancy with very few clinically significant misses. However, the reduced registrar sensitivity for detection of cervical injury highlights the ongoing importance of consultant review in the process of cervical spine clearance pathways.