Do Radiology Residents Perform Well in Preliminary Reporting of Emergency MRIs of Spine?
10.13104/imri.2018.22.1.10
- Author:
Joon Woo LEE
1
;
Guen Young LEE
;
Le Roy CHONG
;
Heung Sik KANG
Author Information
1. Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea. joonwoo2@gmail.com
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Spine;
Magnetic resonance imaging;
Emergency;
Resident;
Discrepancy
- MeSH:
Bone Marrow;
Diagnosis;
Diagnosis, Differential;
Emergencies;
Emergency Service, Hospital;
Humans;
Incidence;
Internship and Residency;
Magnetic Resonance Imaging;
Spinal Cord Injuries;
Spine
- From:Investigative Magnetic Resonance Imaging
2018;22(1):10-17
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: To evaluate interpretation errors involving spine MRIs by residents in their second to fourth year of training, classified as minor, intermediate and major discrepancies, as well as the types of commonly discordant lesions with or without clinical significance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A staff radiologist evaluated both preliminary and final reports of 582 spine MRIs performed in the emergency room from March 2011 to February 2013, involving (1) the incidence of report discrepancy, classified as minor if there was sufficient description of the main MR findings without ancillary or incidental lesions not influencing the main diagnosis, treatment, or patients' clinical course; intermediate if the correct diagnosis was made with insufficient or inadequate explanation, potentially influencing treatment or clinical course; and major if the discrepancy affected the main diagnosis; and (2) the common causes of discrepancy. We analyzed the differences in the incidence of discrepancy with respect to the training years of residents, age and sex of patients. RESULTS: Interpretation discrepancy occurred in 229 of the 582 cases (229/582, 39.3%), including 146 minor (146/582, 25.1%), 40 intermediate (40/582, 6.9%), and 43 major cases (43/582, 7.4%). The common causes of major discrepancy were: over-diagnosis of fracture (n = 10), missed cord lesion (n = 9), missed signal abnormalities associated with diffuse marrow (n = 5), and failure to provide differential diagnosis of focal abnormal marrow signal intensity (n = 5). No significant difference was found in the incidence of minor, intermediate, and major discrepancies according to the levels of residency, patients' age or sex. CONCLUSION: A 7.4% rate of major discrepancies was found in preliminary reporting of emergency MRIs of spine interpreted by radiology residents, probably related to a relative lack of clinical experience, indicating the need for additional training, especially involving spine trauma, spinal cord and bone marrow lesions.
