Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2000 Mar 18;320(7237):737-40.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7237.737.

Reducing errors made by emergency physicians in interpreting radiographs: longitudinal study

J A Espinosa  1 , T W Nolan
Affiliations

Reducing errors made by emergency physicians in interpreting radiographs: longitudinal study

J A Espinosa et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objectives: To reduce errors made in the interpretation of radiographs in an emergency department.

Design: Longitudinal study.

Setting: Hospital emergency department.

Interventions: All staff reviewed all clinically significant discrepancies at monthly meetings. A file of clinically significant errors was created; the file was used for teaching. Later a team redesigned the process. A system was developed for interpreting radiographs that would be followed regardless of the day of the week or time of day. All standard radiographs were brought directly to the emergency physician for immediate interpretation. Radiologists reviewed the films within 12 hours as a quality control measure, and if a significant misinterpretation was found patients were asked to return.

Main outcome measures: Reduction in number of clinically significant errors (such as missed fractures or foreign bodies) on radiographs read in the emergency department. Data on the error rate for radiologists and the effect of the recall procedure were not available so reliability modelling was used to assess the effect of these on overall safety.

Results: After the initial improvements the rate of false negative errors fell from 3% (95% confidence interval 2.8% to 3.2%) to 1.2% (1.03% to 1.37%). After the processes were redesigned it fell further to 0.3% (0.26% to 0.34%). Reliability modelling showed that the number of potential adverse effects per 1000 cases fell from 19 before the improvements to 3 afterwards and unmitigated adverse effects fell from 2.2/1000 before to 0.16/1000 afterwards, assuming 95% success in calling patients back.

Conclusion: Systems of radiograph interpretation that optimise the skills of all clinicians involved and contain reliable processes for mitigating errors can reduce error rates substantially.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure
Figure
Trends in the rate of errors (clinically significant false negative interpretations) made by emergency physicians in interpreting radiographs. Details of the changes are described in the text
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Robinson PJ, Wilson D, Coral A, Murphy A, Verow P. Variation between experienced observers in the interpretation of accident and emergency radiographs. Br J Radiol. 1999;72:323–330. - PubMed
    1. Lufkin KC, Smith SW, Matticks CA, Brunette DD. Radiologists' review of radiographs interpreted confidently by emergency physicians infrequently lead to changes in patient management. Ann Emerg Med. 1998;31:202–207. - PubMed
    1. Scott WW, Jr, Bluemke DA, Mysko WK, Weller GE, Kelen GD, Reichle RL, et al. Interpretation of emergency department radiographs by radiologists and emergency medicine physicians: teleradiology workstation versus radiograph readings. Radiology. 1995;195:223–229. - PubMed
    1. Fleischer G, Ludwig S, McSorley M. Interpretation of pediatric x-ray films by emergency department pediatricians. Ann Emerg Med. 1983;12:153–158. - PubMed
    1. Rhea JT, Potsaid MS, DeLuca SA. Errors of interpretation as elicited by a quality audit of an emergency department facility. Radiology. 1979;132:277–280. - PubMed