An Evaluation of the Quality of Plain Radiograph Interpretations by Radiology Trainees: A Single Institution Experience.

Introduction: The primary communication between the radiologist and referrer is through the radiological report. However, there are incidents of misinterpretation during radiologist training. Therefore, the present study aimed to evaluate the accuracy level and incidence of interpretation errors for plain radiographs among radiology trainees at our institution. Materials and Methods: The present study retrospectively reviewed 508 reported plain radiographs for one year, and two radiologists subsequently evaluated these plain radiographs. The initial diagnosis by the trainee was compared with the radiologists’ evaluation, and the results were categorized as either ‘accurate’, ‘minor discrepancy’, or ‘major discrepancy’. The data were analyzed concerning the overall performance, year of trainee, anatomic area, patient age group, and radiograph type. A chi-square test was performed, with p < 0.05 indicating statistical significance. Results: The overall accuracy rate was 69%, with minor and major discrepancy rates of 21% and 10%, respectively. There was an insignificant increase in overall accuracy with increased years of training, despite a reduction to 58% accuracy among Year 3 trainees. The accuracy level increased between Year 1, Year 2 and Year 4 by 70%, 71% and 75%, respectively (p > 0.05). The accuracy rates for both the adult and pediatric age groups were not statistically significant. The mobile radiographs showed lower accuracy rate of reporting than the plain radiographs. Conclusion: The radiological trainee interpretations for plain radiographs had an average rating with low discrepancy rates. The Year 3 trainees had the lowest accuracy compared to the other trainee groups. However, the present study suggests the need for further research to determine if the current outcomes are outliers or are indicative of a real phenomenon.