Accuracy of emergency physicians' interpretation of computed tomography for urgent-emergent diagnoses in nontraumatic cases.

IF 1.1 Q3 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Omer Faruk Karakoyun, Nalan Kozaci, Mustafa Avci, Huseyin Uzunay
{"title":"Accuracy of emergency physicians' interpretation of computed tomography for urgent-emergent diagnoses in nontraumatic cases.","authors":"Omer Faruk Karakoyun,&nbsp;Nalan Kozaci,&nbsp;Mustafa Avci,&nbsp;Huseyin Uzunay","doi":"10.4103/2452-2473.342804","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study is to evaluate the accuracy levels of the emergency physicians (EPs) managing the patient in the interpretation of the urgent-emergent pathological findings in thoracic and abdominal computed tomography (CT) scans.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The EPs interpreted the CT scans of patients who visited the emergency department because of nontraumatic causes. Then, a radiology instructor made final assessments of these CT scans. Based on the interpretation of the radiology instructor, the false-positive rate, false-negative rate, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and kappa coefficient (κ) of the EPs' interpretations of the CT scans were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 268 thoracics and 185 abdominal CT scans were assessed in our study. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the EPs' interpretation of the thoracic CT scans were 90% and 89%, respectively, whereas the abdominal CT interpretation was 88% and 86%, respectively. There was excellent concordance between the EPs and the radiology instructor with regard to the diagnoses of pneumothorax, pulmonary embolism, pleural effusion, parenchymal pathology, and masses (κ: 0.90, κ: 0.87, κ: 0.71, κ: 0.79, and κ: 0.91, respectively) and to the diagnoses of intraabdominal free fluid, intraabdominal free gas, aortic pathology, splenic pathology, gallbladder pathology, mesenteric artery embolism, appendicitis, gynecological pathology, and renal pathology (κ: 1, κ: 0.92, κ: 0.96, κ: 0.88, κ: 0.80, κ: 0.79, κ: 0.89, κ: 0.88, and κ: 0.82, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The EPs are successful in the interpretation of the urgent-emergent pathological findings in thoracic and abdominal CT scans.</p>","PeriodicalId":46536,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/f9/29/TJEM-22-89.PMC9069923.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/2452-2473.342804","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the accuracy levels of the emergency physicians (EPs) managing the patient in the interpretation of the urgent-emergent pathological findings in thoracic and abdominal computed tomography (CT) scans.

Methods: The EPs interpreted the CT scans of patients who visited the emergency department because of nontraumatic causes. Then, a radiology instructor made final assessments of these CT scans. Based on the interpretation of the radiology instructor, the false-positive rate, false-negative rate, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and kappa coefficient (κ) of the EPs' interpretations of the CT scans were calculated.

Results: A total of 268 thoracics and 185 abdominal CT scans were assessed in our study. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the EPs' interpretation of the thoracic CT scans were 90% and 89%, respectively, whereas the abdominal CT interpretation was 88% and 86%, respectively. There was excellent concordance between the EPs and the radiology instructor with regard to the diagnoses of pneumothorax, pulmonary embolism, pleural effusion, parenchymal pathology, and masses (κ: 0.90, κ: 0.87, κ: 0.71, κ: 0.79, and κ: 0.91, respectively) and to the diagnoses of intraabdominal free fluid, intraabdominal free gas, aortic pathology, splenic pathology, gallbladder pathology, mesenteric artery embolism, appendicitis, gynecological pathology, and renal pathology (κ: 1, κ: 0.92, κ: 0.96, κ: 0.88, κ: 0.80, κ: 0.79, κ: 0.89, κ: 0.88, and κ: 0.82, respectively).

Conclusion: The EPs are successful in the interpretation of the urgent-emergent pathological findings in thoracic and abdominal CT scans.

急诊医师对非创伤性病例急诊诊断的计算机断层扫描解释的准确性。
目的:本研究的目的是评估急诊医生(EPs)在解释胸部和腹部计算机断层扫描(CT)的紧急病理发现时的准确性水平。方法:EPs对因非创伤性原因就诊的急诊患者的CT扫描进行解释。然后,放射学讲师对这些CT扫描结果进行最终评估。根据放射学讲师的解释,计算EPs对CT扫描解释的假阳性率、假阴性率、敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值和kappa系数(κ)。结果:在我们的研究中,共评估了268个胸部和185个腹部CT扫描。EPs对胸部CT扫描的总体敏感性和特异性分别为90%和89%,而腹部CT的总体敏感性和特异性分别为88%和86%。在气胸、肺栓塞、胸膜积液、实质病理、肿块的诊断上,EPs与指导医师的诊断具有良好的一致性(κ: 0.90, κ: 0.87, κ: 0.71, κ: 0.79, κ: 0.91),在腹内游离液、腹内游离气、主动脉病理、脾病理、胆囊病理、肠系膜动脉栓塞、阑尾炎、妇科病理、肾脏病理诊断上,EPs与指导医师的诊断具有良好的一致性(κ: 1, κ: 1)。κ0.92,κ:0.96:0.88,κ:0.80,κ:0.79,κ:0.89,κ:0.88,和κ:分别为0.82)。结论:EPs在解释胸部和腹部CT扫描中的紧急病理表现方面是成功的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊介绍: The Turkish Journal of Emergency Medicine (Turk J Emerg Med) is an International, peer-reviewed, open-access journal that publishes clinical and experimental trials, case reports, invited reviews, case images, letters to the Editor, and interesting research conducted in all fields of Emergency Medicine. The Journal is the official scientific publication of the Emergency Medicine Association of Turkey (EMAT) and is printed four times a year, in January, April, July and October. The language of the journal is English. The Journal is based on independent and unbiased double-blinded peer-reviewed principles. Only unpublished papers that are not under review for publication elsewhere can be submitted. The authors are responsible for the scientific content of the material to be published. The Turkish Journal of Emergency Medicine reserves the right to request any research materials on which the paper is based. The Editorial Board of the Turkish Journal of Emergency Medicine and the Publisher adheres to the principles of the International Council of Medical Journal Editors, the World Association of Medical Editors, the Council of Science Editors, the Committee on Publication Ethics, the US National Library of Medicine, the US Office of Research Integrity, the European Association of Science Editors, and the International Society of Managing and Technical Editors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信