手外伤诊断中的人工智能和人类专业知识:一种协作方法。

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Céline Klein, Pierre Fondu, Daniel Aiham Ghazali, Vladimir Rotari, Osama Abou-Arab, Emmanuel David
{"title":"手外伤诊断中的人工智能和人类专业知识:一种协作方法。","authors":"Céline Klein, Pierre Fondu, Daniel Aiham Ghazali, Vladimir Rotari, Osama Abou-Arab, Emmanuel David","doi":"10.1016/j.otsr.2025.104338","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hand injuries are a frequent reason for an emergency department visit and require a radiographic analysis. Misdiagnosed or undiagnosed injuries may lead to poor functional outcomes. Artificial intelligence (AI) is providing new tools for the diagnosis of injuries in routine clinical practice. The primary objective of the present study was to assess the diagnostic performance of AI in the diagnosis of hand fractures and dislocations, when compared with reviews by two experienced hand surgeons. The secondary objective was to assess the diagnostic performance of a resident vs. the AI.</p><p><strong>Hypothesis: </strong>On the basis of standard radiographs, the AI system would diagnose metacarpal and phalangeal fractures and dislocations with the same level of diagnostic accuracy (i.e. sensitivity and specificity) as senior hand surgeons.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>This single-centre, retrospective study was conducted on hand radiography datasets collected from consecutive patients over the age of 16 consulting in an emergency department. The radiographic data were reviewed by two senior hand surgeons (constituting the gold standard) and a resident. Based on a contingency table, sensitivity, and specificity, the AI's and resident's respective abilities to detect fracture/dislocation were compared with the gold standard. The resident and the AI were also compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>1915 radiographic datasets (4738 X-rays for 1892 patients) were included in the analysis. The Cohen's kappa of 0.865 indicated almost perfect agreement between the two senior surgeons. The AI's analysis yielded a sensitivity [95% confidence interval] of 97.6% [0.96-0.98] and a specificity of 88.9% [87.2-90.4]. False positives were noted in 162 cases. The AI failed to diagnose 11 injuries (0.6%): two dislocations of the proximal interphalangeal joint, seven fractures of the phalanx (including one third phalanx amputation and two metacarpal fractures). Relative to the AI, the resident's analysis yielded a significantly lower sensitivity (p < 0.0001) and a significantly higher specificity (p = 0.007).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>An AI may be a valuable tool in emergency settings - especially for less experienced practitioners - but does not surpass the diagnostic performance of senior surgeons. The AI's ability to detect dislocations and amputations must be improved. An AI can complement (but not replace) a thorough clinical examination.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>III.</p>","PeriodicalId":54664,"journal":{"name":"Orthopaedics & Traumatology-Surgery & Research","volume":" ","pages":"104338"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Artificial intelligence and human expertise in hand trauma diagnosis: A collaborative approach.\",\"authors\":\"Céline Klein, Pierre Fondu, Daniel Aiham Ghazali, Vladimir Rotari, Osama Abou-Arab, Emmanuel David\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.otsr.2025.104338\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hand injuries are a frequent reason for an emergency department visit and require a radiographic analysis. Misdiagnosed or undiagnosed injuries may lead to poor functional outcomes. Artificial intelligence (AI) is providing new tools for the diagnosis of injuries in routine clinical practice. The primary objective of the present study was to assess the diagnostic performance of AI in the diagnosis of hand fractures and dislocations, when compared with reviews by two experienced hand surgeons. The secondary objective was to assess the diagnostic performance of a resident vs. the AI.</p><p><strong>Hypothesis: </strong>On the basis of standard radiographs, the AI system would diagnose metacarpal and phalangeal fractures and dislocations with the same level of diagnostic accuracy (i.e. sensitivity and specificity) as senior hand surgeons.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>This single-centre, retrospective study was conducted on hand radiography datasets collected from consecutive patients over the age of 16 consulting in an emergency department. The radiographic data were reviewed by two senior hand surgeons (constituting the gold standard) and a resident. Based on a contingency table, sensitivity, and specificity, the AI's and resident's respective abilities to detect fracture/dislocation were compared with the gold standard. The resident and the AI were also compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>1915 radiographic datasets (4738 X-rays for 1892 patients) were included in the analysis. The Cohen's kappa of 0.865 indicated almost perfect agreement between the two senior surgeons. The AI's analysis yielded a sensitivity [95% confidence interval] of 97.6% [0.96-0.98] and a specificity of 88.9% [87.2-90.4]. False positives were noted in 162 cases. The AI failed to diagnose 11 injuries (0.6%): two dislocations of the proximal interphalangeal joint, seven fractures of the phalanx (including one third phalanx amputation and two metacarpal fractures). Relative to the AI, the resident's analysis yielded a significantly lower sensitivity (p < 0.0001) and a significantly higher specificity (p = 0.007).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>An AI may be a valuable tool in emergency settings - especially for less experienced practitioners - but does not surpass the diagnostic performance of senior surgeons. The AI's ability to detect dislocations and amputations must be improved. An AI can complement (but not replace) a thorough clinical examination.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>III.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54664,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Orthopaedics & Traumatology-Surgery & Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"104338\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Orthopaedics & Traumatology-Surgery & Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2025.104338\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopaedics & Traumatology-Surgery & Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2025.104338","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:手部损伤是急诊科就诊的常见原因,需要放射学分析。误诊或未确诊的损伤可能导致不良的功能预后。人工智能(AI)正在为常规临床实践中的损伤诊断提供新的工具。本研究的主要目的是评估人工智能在手部骨折和脱位诊断中的诊断性能,并与两位经验丰富的手外科医生的评价进行比较。次要目标是评估住院医生与人工智能的诊断表现。假设:在标准x线片的基础上,人工智能系统诊断掌骨和指骨骨折和脱位的诊断准确率(即灵敏度和特异性)与高级手外科医生相同。患者和方法:这项单中心、回顾性研究收集了在急诊科咨询的16岁以上连续患者的手部x线摄影数据集。放射学数据由两名资深手外科医生(构成金标准)和一名住院医生审查。根据列联表、敏感性和特异性,将人工智能和住院医生各自检测骨折/脱位的能力与金标准进行比较。并对居民和人工智能进行了比较。结果:纳入1915组x线影像资料(1892例患者4738张x线片)。科恩kappa为0.865,表明两位资深外科医生的意见几乎完全一致。人工智能分析的灵敏度[95%置信区间]为97.6%[0.96-0.98],特异性为88.9%[87.2-90.4]。假阳性162例。人工智能漏诊11例(0.6%):2例近端指间关节脱位,7例指骨骨折(包括1 / 3指骨截肢和2例掌骨骨折)。与人工智能相比,住院医生的分析灵敏度明显较低(p结论:人工智能在急诊环境中可能是一种有价值的工具,尤其是对经验不足的医生来说,但其诊断性能无法超过资深外科医生。人工智能检测脱臼和截肢的能力必须得到提高。人工智能可以补充(但不能取代)彻底的临床检查。证据水平:III。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Artificial intelligence and human expertise in hand trauma diagnosis: A collaborative approach.

Background: Hand injuries are a frequent reason for an emergency department visit and require a radiographic analysis. Misdiagnosed or undiagnosed injuries may lead to poor functional outcomes. Artificial intelligence (AI) is providing new tools for the diagnosis of injuries in routine clinical practice. The primary objective of the present study was to assess the diagnostic performance of AI in the diagnosis of hand fractures and dislocations, when compared with reviews by two experienced hand surgeons. The secondary objective was to assess the diagnostic performance of a resident vs. the AI.

Hypothesis: On the basis of standard radiographs, the AI system would diagnose metacarpal and phalangeal fractures and dislocations with the same level of diagnostic accuracy (i.e. sensitivity and specificity) as senior hand surgeons.

Patients and methods: This single-centre, retrospective study was conducted on hand radiography datasets collected from consecutive patients over the age of 16 consulting in an emergency department. The radiographic data were reviewed by two senior hand surgeons (constituting the gold standard) and a resident. Based on a contingency table, sensitivity, and specificity, the AI's and resident's respective abilities to detect fracture/dislocation were compared with the gold standard. The resident and the AI were also compared.

Results: 1915 radiographic datasets (4738 X-rays for 1892 patients) were included in the analysis. The Cohen's kappa of 0.865 indicated almost perfect agreement between the two senior surgeons. The AI's analysis yielded a sensitivity [95% confidence interval] of 97.6% [0.96-0.98] and a specificity of 88.9% [87.2-90.4]. False positives were noted in 162 cases. The AI failed to diagnose 11 injuries (0.6%): two dislocations of the proximal interphalangeal joint, seven fractures of the phalanx (including one third phalanx amputation and two metacarpal fractures). Relative to the AI, the resident's analysis yielded a significantly lower sensitivity (p < 0.0001) and a significantly higher specificity (p = 0.007).

Conclusion: An AI may be a valuable tool in emergency settings - especially for less experienced practitioners - but does not surpass the diagnostic performance of senior surgeons. The AI's ability to detect dislocations and amputations must be improved. An AI can complement (but not replace) a thorough clinical examination.

Level of evidence: III.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
26.10%
发文量
329
审稿时长
12.5 weeks
期刊介绍: Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery & Research (OTSR) publishes original scientific work in English related to all domains of orthopaedics. Original articles, Reviews, Technical notes and Concise follow-up of a former OTSR study are published in English in electronic form only and indexed in the main international databases.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信