尿石症的放射学评价。

E Laerum, A M Finnanger, G Stiris, O Heldaas, S Larsen
{"title":"尿石症的放射学评价。","authors":"E Laerum,&nbsp;A M Finnanger,&nbsp;G Stiris,&nbsp;O Heldaas,&nbsp;S Larsen","doi":"10.1177/028418518602700514","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Interobserver variations between three radiologists with different backgrounds (duration of practice, and departments) were studied in connection with the diagnosing of urolithiasis. Films from 152 consecutive patients (examined with conventional abdominal films, urography/tomography) were analyzed independently. With respect to the number of patients with or without calculi there was agreement between the three observers in 129 of the 152 cases, which was taken to represent very good agreement beyond chance. The total number of stones was interpreted as 832, 460 and 570 respectively, and the median stone size as 6, 9 and 11 mm2. There was a fair interobserver agreement rate regarding whether stones were localized to the renal parenchyma or calyces, and whether stenosis/stricture or hydronephrosis was present. Tomography appeared to reduce the interobserver variability significantly. Adequate bowel cleaning, oblique projections, and lack of clinical information apparently did not influence the agreement rate. It was concluded that such interobserver variations are factors of importance in the reliability of the radiologic evaluation of urolithiasis.</p>","PeriodicalId":7142,"journal":{"name":"Acta radiologica: diagnosis","volume":"27 5","pages":"561-4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1986-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/028418518602700514","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Radiologic evaluation of urolithiasis.\",\"authors\":\"E Laerum,&nbsp;A M Finnanger,&nbsp;G Stiris,&nbsp;O Heldaas,&nbsp;S Larsen\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/028418518602700514\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Interobserver variations between three radiologists with different backgrounds (duration of practice, and departments) were studied in connection with the diagnosing of urolithiasis. Films from 152 consecutive patients (examined with conventional abdominal films, urography/tomography) were analyzed independently. With respect to the number of patients with or without calculi there was agreement between the three observers in 129 of the 152 cases, which was taken to represent very good agreement beyond chance. The total number of stones was interpreted as 832, 460 and 570 respectively, and the median stone size as 6, 9 and 11 mm2. There was a fair interobserver agreement rate regarding whether stones were localized to the renal parenchyma or calyces, and whether stenosis/stricture or hydronephrosis was present. Tomography appeared to reduce the interobserver variability significantly. Adequate bowel cleaning, oblique projections, and lack of clinical information apparently did not influence the agreement rate. It was concluded that such interobserver variations are factors of importance in the reliability of the radiologic evaluation of urolithiasis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7142,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta radiologica: diagnosis\",\"volume\":\"27 5\",\"pages\":\"561-4\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1986-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/028418518602700514\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta radiologica: diagnosis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/028418518602700514\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta radiologica: diagnosis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/028418518602700514","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

研究了不同背景(执业时间和科室)的三名放射科医生在尿石症诊断方面的观察差异。对152例连续患者的影像(常规腹部片、尿路摄影/断层扫描)进行独立分析。关于有或没有结石的患者数量,在152例中,有129例的三名观察员意见一致,这被认为是非常好的一致。石头的总数分别为832、460和570,石头的中位数大小分别为6、9和11 mm2。对于结石是否局限于肾实质或肾盏,以及是否存在狭窄/狭窄或肾积水,观察者之间的一致性比较好。断层扫描似乎显著降低了观察者之间的可变性。充分的肠道清洁、斜位投影和缺乏临床信息显然不影响一致性。结论是,这种观察者之间的差异是影响尿石症放射学评估可靠性的重要因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Radiologic evaluation of urolithiasis.

Interobserver variations between three radiologists with different backgrounds (duration of practice, and departments) were studied in connection with the diagnosing of urolithiasis. Films from 152 consecutive patients (examined with conventional abdominal films, urography/tomography) were analyzed independently. With respect to the number of patients with or without calculi there was agreement between the three observers in 129 of the 152 cases, which was taken to represent very good agreement beyond chance. The total number of stones was interpreted as 832, 460 and 570 respectively, and the median stone size as 6, 9 and 11 mm2. There was a fair interobserver agreement rate regarding whether stones were localized to the renal parenchyma or calyces, and whether stenosis/stricture or hydronephrosis was present. Tomography appeared to reduce the interobserver variability significantly. Adequate bowel cleaning, oblique projections, and lack of clinical information apparently did not influence the agreement rate. It was concluded that such interobserver variations are factors of importance in the reliability of the radiologic evaluation of urolithiasis.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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