Improving the quality and safety of radiology reporting: A prospective audit of discrepancies among consultant radiologists

Abstract

AbstractObjectivesTo examine discrepancy rates over multiple annual cycles in reporting by consultant radiologists for the interpretation of acute Computerized Tomography (CT) examinations.MethodsA prospective audit with peer review and second reading of acute CT scans was implemented in one radiology department in the UK. A longitudinal audit over 5 years was performed to determine the discrepancy rate of acute and emergency CT scans conducted on weekends. The examinations comprised CT head, thorax, abdomen and pelvis, CT Kidneys, Ureters, and Bladder (CT KUB), and CT angiography scans. Discrepancies were scored as no discrepancy (zero), minor discrepancy (one), moderate discrepancy (two), or significant discrepancy (three). Seventeen consultants took part in the audit as primary reporters and second readers. All consultants were on‐call radiologists, and the allocation of cases was randomized depending on the on‐call rota. Results were reported annually to one consultant radiologist.ResultsA significant discrepancy rate of 1.2% (p = 0.026) was found for consultant radiologists, interpreting acute CT examinations based on 2951 s read CT scans.ConclusionsTo the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to establish significant discrepancy rates among consultant radiologists, interpreting acute CT examinations over time.