RSNA-STR-ACR Consensus Statement for COVID-19 CT Patterns: Interreader Agreement in 240 Consecutive Patients and Association With RT-PCR Status.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to study interreader agreement of the RSNA-STR-ACR (Radiological Society of North America/Society of Thoracic Radiology/American College of Radiology) consensus statement on reporting chest computed tomography (CT) findings related to COVID-19 on a sample of consecutive patients confirmed with reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This institutional review board-approved retrospective study included 240 cases with a mean age of 47.6 ± 15.9 years, ranging from 20 to 90 years, who had a chest CT and RT-PCR performed. Computed tomography images were independently analyzed by 2 thoracic radiologists to identify patterns defined by the RSNA-STR-ACR consensus statement, and concordance was determined with weighted κ tests. Also, CT findings and CT severity scores were tabulated and compared. RESULTS: Of the 240 cases, 118 had findings on CT. The most frequent on the RT-PCR-positive group were areas of ground-glass opacities (80.5%), crazy-paving pattern (32.2%), and rounded pseudonodular ground-glass opacities (22.9%). Regarding the CT patterns, the most frequent in the RT-PCR-positive group was typical in 75.9%, followed by negative in 17.1%. The interreader agreement was 0.90 (95% confidence interval, 0.80-0.96) in this group. The CT severity score had a mean difference of -0.07 (95% confidence interval, -0.48 to 0.34) among the readers, showing no significant differences regarding visual estimation. CONCLUSIONS: The RSNA-STR-ACR consensus statement on reporting chest CT patterns for COVID-19 presents a high interreader agreement, with the typical pattern being more frequently associated with RT-PCR-positive examinations.

Reporting radiographers' interpretation and use of the British Society of Thoracic Imaging's coding system when reporting COVID-19 chest x-rays.

INTRODUCTION: The United Kingdom (UK) has experienced one of the worst initial waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinical signs help guide initial diagnosis, though definitive diagnosis is made using the laboratory technique reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). The chest x-ray (CXR) is used as the primary imaging investigation in the United Kingdom (UK) for patients with suspected COVID-19. In some hospitals these CXRs may be reported by a radiographer. METHODS: Retrospective review of CXR reports by radiographers for suspected COVID-19 patients attending the Emergency Department (ED) of a hospital in the UK. Interpretation and use of the British Society of Thoracic Imaging (BSTI) coding system was assessed. Report description and code use were cross-checked. Report and code usage were checked against the RT-PCR result to determine accuracy. Report availability was checked against the availability of the RT-PCR result. A confusion matrix was utilised to determine performance. The data were analysed manually using Excel. RESULTS: Sample size was 320 patients; 54.1% male patients (n = 173), 45.9% female patients (n = 147). The correct code matched report descriptions in 316 of the 320 cases (98.8%). In 299 of the 320 cases (93.4%), the reports were available before the RT-PCR swab result. CXR sensitivity for detecting COVID-19 was 85% compared to 93% for the initial RT-PCR. CONCLUSION: Reporting radiographers can adequately utilise and apply the BSTI classification system when reporting COVID-19 CXRs. They can recognise the classic CXR appearances of COVID-19 and those with normal appearances. Future best practice includes checking laboratory results when reporting CXRs with ambiguous appearances. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Utilisation of reporting radiographers to report CXRs in any future respiratory pandemic should be considered a service-enabling development.