Trainee reporting of computed tomography examinations: do they make mistakes and does it matter?
Hillier JC., Tattersall DJ., Gleeson FV.
AIM: To determine the accuracy of trainees reporting computed tomography (CT) examinations. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Over a 6-month period a single consultant reviewed all the CT examinations reported by registrars in one radiology department. After recording a provisional registrar report each examination was jointly reviewed by the consultant and registrar. The consultant's opinion was regarded as the gold standard. Data collected included: the error rate, whether an error was significant, leading to a change in patient management, and whether the mistake was a false-negative or positive. RESULTS: Three hundred and thirty-one patients were included in the study. There was an overall error rate of 21.5%. A significant error leading to a change in management was made in 10% of reports, and a significant error that did not lead to a change in management was made in 9.3%; 2.1% of reports had insignificant errors; and 69% of errors were false-negatives. CONCLUSION: Registrars make a significant number of errors affecting patient management when reporting CT and ideally all examinations should be reviewed by a consultant.