English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Purpose Evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of a checklist-style structured reporting template in the setting of whole-body multislice computed tomography in major trauma patients depending on the level of experience of the reporting radiologist.  Materials and Methods A total of 140 major trauma scans with the same protocol were included in this retrospective study. In a purely trial-intended reading, the trauma scans were analyzed by three radiologists with different levels of experience (resident, radiologist with 3 years of experience after board certification, and radiologist with 7 years of experience after board certification). The aim was to fill in the checklist 1 template within one minute to immediately diagnose management-altering findings. Checklist 2 was intended for the analysis of important trauma-related findings within 10 minutes. Reading times were documented. The final radiology report and the documented injuries in the patient’s medical record were used as gold standard.  Results The evaluation of checklist 1 showed a range of false-negative reports between 5.0 % and 11.4 % with the resident showing the highest accuracy. Checklist 2 showed overall high diagnostic inaccuracy (19.3–35.0 %). The resident's diagnostic accuracy was statistically significantly higher compared to the radiologist with 3 years of experience after board certification (p = 0.0197) and with 7 years of experience after board certification (p = 0.0046). Shorter average reporting time resulted in higher diagnostic inaccuracy. Most of the missed diagnoses were fractures of the spine and ribs.  Conclusion By using a structured reporting template in the setting of major trauma computed tomography, less experienced radiologists reach a higher diagnostic accuracy compared to experienced readers.  Key Points:   Citation Format

röfo. fortschritte auf dem gebiet der röntgenstrahlen und der bildgebenden verfahren

Structured Reporting of Whole-Body Trauma CT Scans Using Checklists: Diagnostic Accuracy of Reporting Radiologists Depending on Their Level of Experience