RESUMO
Chest radiography is a frequently used imaging modality in children. However, only fair to moderate inter-observer agreement has been reported between chest radiograph interpreters. Most studies were not performed in real-world clinical settings. Our aims were to examine the agreement between emergency department pediatricians and board-certified radiologists in a pediatric real-life setting and to identify clinical risk factors for the discrepancies. Included were children aged 3 months to 18 years who underwent chest radiography in the emergency department not during the regular hours of radiologist interpretation. Every case was reviewed by an expert panel. Inter-observer agreement between emergency department pediatricians and board-certified radiologists was assessed by Cohen's kappa; risk factors for disagreement were analyzed. Among 1373 cases, the level of agreement between emergency department pediatricians and board-certified radiologists was "moderate" (k = 0.505). For radiographs performed after midnight, agreement was only "fair" (k = 0.391). The expert panel identified clinically relevant disagreements in 260 (18.9%) of the radiographs. Over-treatment of antibiotics was identified in 121 (8.9%) of the cases and under-treatment in 79 (5.8%). In a multivariable logistic regression, the following parameters were found to be significantly associated with disagreements: neurological background (p = 0.046), fever (p = 0.001), dyspnea (p = 0.014), and radiographs performed after midnight (p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate agreement was found between emergency department pediatricians and board-certified radiologists in interpreting chest radiographs. Neurological background, fever, dyspnea, and radiographs performed after midnight were identified as risk factors for disagreement. Implementing these findings could facilitate the use of radiologist expertise, save time and resources, and potentially improve patient care. WHAT IS KNOWN: ⢠Only fair to moderate inter-observer agreement has been reported between chest radiograph interpreters. ⢠Most studies were not performed in real-world clinical settings. Clinical risk factors for disagreements have not been reported. WHAT IS NEW: ⢠In this study, which included 1373 cases at the emergency department, the level of agreement between interpreters was only "moderate." ⢠The major clinical parameters associated with interpretation discrepancies were neurological background, fever, dyspnea, and interpretations conducted during the night shift.