HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Rosen, M. P. Articles by McArdle, C. R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Rosen, M. P. Articles by McArdle, C. R.

Diagnostic Accuracy with US: Remote Radiologists' versus On-site Radiologists' Interpretations

¹ Department of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, 330 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA 02215.

PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of radiologists interpreting static ultrasonographic (US) images electronically transmitted to an academic medical center (remote radiologists) with that of radiologists performing "hands-on" US at a community-based outpatient site (on-site radiologists).

MATERIALS AND METHODS: During 8 months, 80 patients underwent pelvic US at a community-based outpatient site. Images were electronically transmitted to a remote medical center as they were acquired at the community site and were printed on a laser printer identical to the one used at the outpatient site. The reference standard for correct diagnosis was based on histopathologic findings (n = 13), additional imaging results (n = 34), or review by a second independent observer (n = 33). Both an on-site and a remote radiologist interpreted the images, and their interpretations were rated as agree, both correct; agree, both incorrect; or disagree. Cases of disagreement were rated as major or minor.

RESULTS: On-site and remote radiologists agreed in 69 of 80 patients (86%), and both radiologists were correct in all of these cases. There were 10 minor discrepancies and one major discrepancy. The diagnostic accuracies of the on-site and remote radiologists were 92% and 94%, respectively.

CONCLUSION: High levels of diagnostic accuracy can be achieved by radiologists interpreting static US images. Strict protocols and excellent communication between the radiologist and sonographer are necessary to avoid diagnostic errors.

Index terms: Pelvic organs, diseases, 85.31 • Pelvic organs, US, 85.12981, 85.12983 • Pregnancy, US, 85.131 • Radiology and radiologists, departmental management • Teleradiology

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. P. Rosen, T. S. Mehta, R. Bromberg, S. L. Kelly, and D. Levine Remote Sonographic Interpretation Using a Laser Printer Network: System Performance and Diagnostic Accuracy in Actual Clinical Practice Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2001; 176(4): 855 - 860. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. M. Schlag, K. T. Moesta, S. Rakovsky, and G. Graschew Telemedicine: The New Must for Surgery Arch Surg, November 1, 1999; 134(11): 1216 - 1221. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]