Skip to main content
Log in

Diagnostic errors in interpretation of pediatric musculoskeletal radiographs at common injury sites

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Pediatric Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Extremity pain represents one of the most common reasons for obtaining conventional radiographs in childhood. Despite the frequency of these examinations little is known about the incidence of diagnostic errors by interpreting pediatric radiologists.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to develop a standard error rate of pediatric radiologists by double-reading of extremity radiographs (elbow, wrists, knees and ankles) in children presenting with a history of trauma or pain.

Materials and methods

During a 6-month period all major extremity radiographs (excluding digits) obtained at a large pediatric referral hospital for evaluation of pain or trauma were reviewed by two senior pediatric radiologists and compared to the official interpretation. All radiographs were interpreted initially by a board-certified pediatric radiologist with a Certificate of Added Qualification (CAQ). We reviewed 3,865 radiographic series in children and young adults 2–20 years of age. We tabulated misses and overcalls. We did not assess the clinical significance of the errors.

Results

There were 61 miss errors and 44 overcalls in 1,235 abnormal cases and 2,630 normal cases, for a 1.6% miss rate and a 1.1% overcall rate. Misses and overcalls were most common in the ankle.

Conclusion

Interpretive errors by pediatric radiologists reviewing certain musculoskeletal radiographs are relatively infrequent. Diagnostic errors in the form of a miss or overcall occurred in 2.7% of the radiographs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Borgstede JP, Lewis RS, Bhargavan M et al (2004) RADPEER quality assurance program: a multifacility study of interpretive disagreement rates. J Am Coll Radiol 1:59–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Garland LH (1949) On the scientific evaluation of diagnostic procedures. Radiology 52:309–328

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Berlin L (2007) Accuracy of diagnostic procedures: has it improved over the past 5 decades? AJR Am J Roentgenol 188:1173–1178

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Siegle RL, Baram EM, Reuter SR et al (1998) Rates of disagreement in imaging interpretation in a group of community hospitals. Acad Radiol 5:148–154

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Soffa DJ, Lewis RS, Sunshine JH et al (2004) Disagreement in interpretation: a method for the development of benchmarks for quality assurance in imaging. J Am Coll Radiol 1:212–217

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to George S. Bisset III.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bisset, G.S., Crowe, J. Diagnostic errors in interpretation of pediatric musculoskeletal radiographs at common injury sites. Pediatr Radiol 44, 552–557 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-013-2869-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-013-2869-9

Keywords

Navigation