RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The possibility to perform standard X-rays is mandatory for all French Emergency Department (ED). Initial interpretation is under the prescriber emergency physician-who continually works under extreme conditions, but a radiologist needs to describe a report as soon as possible. We decided to assess the rate of discordance between emergency physicians and radiologists among discharged patients. METHODS: We performed a monocentric study on an adult ED among discharged patients who had at least one X-ray during their consult. We used an automatic electronic system that classified interpretation as concordant or discordant. We review all discordant interpretation, which were classified as false negative, false positive, or more exam needed. RESULTS: For 1 year, 8988 patients had 12,666 X-rays. We found a total of 742 (5.9%) discordant X-rays, but only 277 (2.2%) discordance had a consequence (new consult or exam not initially scheduled). We found some factors associated with discordance such as male sex, or ankle, foot, knee, finger, wrist, ribs, and elbow locations. CONCLUSIONS: On discharged patients, using a systematic second interpretation of X-ray by a radiologist, we found a total of 2.2% discordance that had an impact on the initial care.