Overnight radiology resident discrepancies at a large pediatric hospital: categorization by year of training, program, imaging modality, and report type.

BACKGROUND: Overnight radiology resident discrepancies have been described in multiple studies; however, study of resident discrepancies specific to pediatric radiology is limited. PURPOSE: To examine radiology resident discrepancies as they pertain to a large pediatric hospital system. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 21,560 preliminary reports issued by 39 residents over a one-year period were scored as agreement, minor discrepancy, or major discrepancy by faculty members using a modification of the 2009 RADPEER scoring system. Residents were trainees of three different diagnostic radiology programs: large university-based, medium-sized community-based, or small community-based. Discrepancy rates were evaluated based on resident postgraduate year, program, and imaging modality. The effect of a general pediatric radiology report versus pediatric neuroradiology report of a CT scan was also tested. CT was the only modality in which there were comparable numbers of studies scored by both general pediatric radiologists and neuroradiologists. RESULTS: The rate of major resident to faculty assessment discrepancies was 1.01%, and the rate of minor resident to faculty assessment discrepancies was 4.47%. Major discrepancy rates by postgraduate years 3-5 were 1.08%, 0.75%, and 1.59%, respectively. Major discrepancy rates were highest for MR (11.22%), followed by CT (1.82%), radiographs (0.91%), and ultrasound (0.56%). There was no significant difference in discrepancy rate between residency programs and general pediatric radiology report of a CT versus pediatric neuroradiology report of a CT. CONCLUSION: Radiology discrepancy rates for residents issuing preliminary reports at a large children's hospital system are similar to those reported for adult procedures.

Discrepancy rates of preliminary and final reports for after-hours pediatric teleradiology interpretations.

BACKGROUND: Children's hospitals often do not have a high enough volume to justify providing radiologist staffing overnight, leading to hospitals employing teleradiology services to offer preliminary reports. There is limited literature related to discrepancies between preliminary teleradiology pediatric radiologists and final interpretations. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to examine discrepancy rates for teleradiologists preliminarily interpreting pediatric exams at a children's hospital. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eight thousand seven hundred seventy-eight consecutive preliminary reports issued by pediatric teleradiologists were reviewed. The hospital utilized a system in which local onsite radiologists rated the preliminary reports of teleradiologists following the interpretations as part of standard operating procedure. Discrepancies were also rated according to whether the discrepancy was actionable (judged to alter patient management by the final rater) or not. Rates were stratified by modality, preliminary teleradiologist reader, and final rater and compared to each using a normal approximation. The mean discrepancy rates were compared using a z test for proportions. Linear regression was applied to the effect of years of radiologist experience on the total and actionable discrepancy rates. RESULTS: The overall actionable discrepancy rate was 1.6%, similar to inter-observer discrepancy rates reported in other studies. There were no significant differences in the actionable discrepancy rates among teleradiologists. There was no correlation between years of experience and discrepancy rate for either the teleradiologists or the final raters. CONCLUSION: Pediatric subspecialty teleradiologists issue reports that mirror discrepancy rates typical of radiologists who issue reports for emergent adult studies. Years of radiologist experience is not a predictor of discrepancy rate.

Relative United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Performance by Specialty Is Not a Predictor of Board Exam Pass Rate: The Case of Diagnostic Radiology.

Introduction In 2010 diagnostic radiology (DR) changed the board certification process for residents using the new Core exam. However, there is not a standardized way to evaluate DR residency graduates. With no specific target pass rate for the exam, the "appropriate" pass rate has remained a debated topic among the field. In this paper, the board certification exam passage rates of DR are compared to other medical specialties to assess the standardization method of the American Board of Radiology (ABR) and serve as basis for additional specialties considering changes to their board exam structure. Methods Performance on the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) was obtained from the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) and San Francisco match. Boards passage rates were analyzed using data from the American Board of Medical Specialties. USMLE and board exam passage rates were averaged and ranked, and statistical analysis was conducted using Stata (College Station, TX). Results DR performance on USMLE Step 1 has increased at the lowest rate (0.563 points/year) since 2005 and anesthesiology performance has increased at the greatest rate (1.313 points/year). Residents matching from US allopathic medical schools during the 2010 and 2012 years had DR oral board exams with USMLE 1 averages of 232 and 235, respectively. First-time pass rate for the first Core exam was 87% and the overall pass rate since the first Core exam has been 88.54%. The Spearman rho coefficient for specialty ranks of board passage rate and USMLE 1 was 0.0679 (p = 0.8101). The Spearman rho coefficient for board passage rate and USMLE 2 CK was 0.1430 (p = 0.6257). The Spearman rho coefficient for USMLE 1 and USMLE 2 CK was 0.8317 (p = 0.0002). Conclusions Specialty board pass rates have not increased in concert with improved trainee performance on the USMLE. USMLE performance among those matching in diagnostic radiology has increased, ABR board exam passage rate has decreased. ABR determines passing thresholds to the relative performance of examinees rather than using a criterion referenced Angoff standard.

Errors in Breast Imaging: How to Reduce Errors and Promote a Safety Environment.

Medical errors have a significant impact on patient care, worker safety, and health care finances. Breast imaging has the most common cause of organ-related misdiagnosis subject to malpractice suits. In order to effectively develop strategies to prevent errors, breast imaging radiologists must first understand the underlying causes of the errors that occur in the breast imaging setting. Errors in breast imaging can be related to errors in interpretation, improper workup of imaging findings, procedural errors, or errors in communication to the patient or other medical staff. The Yorkshire contributory factors framework was developed to identify factors that contribute to the errors in a hospital setting and can be adapted for use in the breast imaging setting. Within this framework, active failures refer to errors that directly affect the patient. Active errors include slips (including biases), lapses, and mistakes. The framework describes how active errors often result from factors that occur uphill from these active errors at different levels within the system. Once error causes are understood, there are concrete strategies and tools that breast imaging radiologists can implement to decrease adverse events, reduce medical errors, and promote a safety environment in the breast imaging clinic. Error mitigation tools can be summarized using the acronym SAFE, which includes support the team, ask questions, focus on a task, and effectively communicate/ensure equipment optimization/safe environment. Knowledge of errors commonly seen in a breast imaging clinic represent an opportunity for constructive changes and, ultimately, improved health care delivery.

Synergistic Growth in Number of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology Matches at Pennsylvania State College of Medicine After 2016.

In 2016, when interventional radiology (IR) separated from diagnostic radiology (DR), the future implications were unknown. The goal of this study is to investigate trends in DR and IR matches at Penn State College of Medicine (PSCOM) from 2011-2020, particularly before and after 2016. This retrospective study generated descriptive statistics and paired t-tests, finding a statistically significant difference in mean number of DR and IR matches before and after 2016. More specifically, the number of DR matches increased from 3.8 to 6.4 (p = 0.0004) and IR matches increased from 0 to 2 (p = 0.03). These trends suggest a synergistic growth in both specialties.

Effects of Tedizolid Phosphate on Survival Outcomes and Suppression of Production of Staphylococcal Toxins in a Rabbit Model of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Necrotizing Pneumonia.

The protective efficacy of tedizolid phosphate, a novel oxazolidinone that potently inhibits bacterial protein synthesis, was compared to those of linezolid, vancomycin, and saline in a rabbit model of Staphylococcus aureus necrotizing pneumonia. Tedizolid phosphate was administered to rabbits at 6 mg/kg of body weight intravenously twice daily, which yielded values of the 24-h area under the concentration-time curve approximating those found in humans. The overall survival rate was 83% for rabbits treated with 6 mg/kg tedizolid phosphate twice daily and 83% for those treated with 50 mg/kg linezolid thrice daily (P = 0.66 by the log-rank test versus the results obtained with tedizolid phosphate). These survival rates were significantly greater than the survival rates of 17% for rabbits treated with 30 mg/kg vancomycin twice daily (P = 0.003) and 17% for rabbits treated with saline (P = 0.002). The bacterial count in the lungs of rabbits treated with tedizolid phosphate was significantly decreased compared to that in the lungs of rabbits treated with saline, although it was not significantly different from that in the lungs of rabbits treated with vancomycin or linezolid. The in vivo bacterial production of alpha-toxin and Panton-Valentine leukocidin, two key S. aureus-secreted toxins that play critical roles in the pathogenesis of necrotizing pneumonia, in the lungs of rabbits treated with tedizolid phosphate and linezolid was significantly inhibited compared to that in the lungs of rabbits treated with vancomycin or saline. Taken together, these results indicate that tedizolid phosphate is superior to vancomycin for the treatment of S. aureus necrotizing pneumonia because it inhibits the bacterial production of lung-damaging toxins at the site of infection.