Aim: The reporting of medical imaging with outsourcing is used by many hospitals in Turkey. The aim of this study was to evaluate outsourced computed tomography (CT) reports and determine any errors made.
Material and Methods: The study was planned with a prospective design. The reports of the CT tests taken during 2017 by an outsourced company of 35 randomly selected patients were compared. In the comparison, findings which could lead to a change in diagnosis and treatment were labelled as significant and findings which would not lead to a change in diagnosis and treatment were labelled as non-significant. Findings reported in the study comparison but not mentioned or written incorrectly in the outsourced company report were classified as absence and any finding that was written but not present was labelled as extra.
Results: The study included the examsimages and reports of 35 patients, comprising 18 (51.4%) males and 17 (48.6%) females with a mean age of 49.37± 23.66 years. A major error was found in 27 (77%) cases. No statistically significant difference was determined in the significant, non-significant, absent and extra data according to patient age (p>0.05).
Conclusion: There should be an implementation of regulations for clinicians to be able to re-use the diagnostic algorithm. Residential employment of radiologists should be encouraged rather than outsourcing.
Key words: Radiology; Outsourcing; Teleradiology; Diagnostic Errors; Misdiagnosis.
|
