ScienceDirect® Home Skip Main Navigation Links
You have guest access to ScienceDirect. Find out more.
 
Home
Browse
My Settings
Alerts
Help
 Quick Search
 Search tips (Opens new window)
    Clear all fields    
Journal of Emergency Medicine
Article in Press, Corrected Proof - Note to users
 
Font Size: Decrease Font Size  Increase Font Size
 Abstract - selected
Article
Purchase PDF (129 K)

Article Toolbox
 
 
 
Related Articles in ScienceDirect
View More Related Articles
 
doi:10.1016/j.jemermed.2008.01.015    
How to Cite or Link Using DOI (Opens New Window)

Copyright © 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Selected Topics: Emergency Radiology

Teleradiology interpretations of emergency department computed tomography scans

Purchase the full-text article



References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.

Timothy F. Platts-Mills MD1, Corresponding Author Contact Information, a, Gregory W. Hendey MDa and Brian Ferguson BSa

aDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of California San Francisco-Fresno, Fresno, California


Received 19 November 2007; 
revised 8 January 2008; 
accepted 9 January 2008. 
Available online 23 September 2008.

Abstract

Background: Teleradiologist interpretation of radiographic studies during after-hours Emergency Department (ED) care has the potential to influence patient management. Study Objectives: We sought to characterize frequencies of discrepancies between teleradiology and in-house radiology interpretations for computed tomography (CT) scans. Methods: We conducted a prospective observational study comparing teleradiologist and in-house radiologist interpretations of CT scans obtained between 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. from the ED at a Level I trauma center. For each scan, discrepancies were characterized as major, minor, or no discrepancy. Follow-up data were used to characterize major discrepancies. Results: Of 787 studies sent to teleradiology, 550 were scans of the head, cervical spine, chest, or abdomen and pelvis. Major discrepancies were identified in 32 of 550 studies (5.8%; 95% confidence interval 4.1%–8.1%), including 7 of 160 head CT scans, 1 of 29 cervical spine CT scans, 3 of 64 chest CT scans, and 21 of 297 abdominopelvic CT scans. We attributed 8 of the 32 major discrepancies to a teleradiology misinterpretation, with one case leading to an adverse event. Conclusions: We identified major discrepancies due to teleradiologist misinterpretation in 8 of 550 studies, with one patient suffering an adverse event. Our findings support the cautious use of teleradiology interpretations.

Keywords: teleradiology; diagnosis; diagnostic errors; emergency medicine; computed tomography

Article Outline

Introduction
Material and methods
Study Design
Study Setting and Population
Image Selection
Study Protocol
Data Analysis
Results
Discussion
Limitations
Conclusions
References


Corresponding Author Contact InformationCorresponding Address: Timothy F. Platts-Mills, MD, Department of Emergency Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 170 Manning Drive CB#7594, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7594
1 Current affiliation: Department of Emergency Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.

Note to users: The section "Articles in Press" contains peer reviewed accepted articles to be published in this journal. When the final article is assigned to an issue of the journal, the "Article in Press" version will be removed from this section and will appear in the associated published journal issue. The date it was first made available online will be carried over. Please be aware that although "Articles in Press" do not have all bibliographic details available yet, they can already be cited using the year of online publication and the DOI as follows: Author(s), Article Title, Journal (Year), DOI. Please consult the journal's reference style for the exact appearance of these elements, abbreviation of journal names and the use of punctuation.
There are three types of "Articles in Press":
  • Accepted manuscripts: these are articles that have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication by the Editorial Board. The articles have not yet been copy edited and/or formatted in the journal house style.
  • Uncorrected proofs: these are copy edited and formatted articles that are not yet finalized and that will be corrected by the authors. Therefore the text could change before final publication.
  • Corrected proofs: these are articles containing the authors' corrections and may, or may not yet have specific issue and page numbers assigned.

Journal of Emergency Medicine
Article in Press, Corrected Proof - Note to users
 
Home
Browse
My Settings
Alerts
Help
Elsevier.com (Opens new window)
About ScienceDirect  |  Contact Us  |  Information for Advertisers  |  Terms & Conditions  |  Privacy Policy
Copyright © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. ScienceDirect® is a registered trademark of Elsevier B.V.