Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) Expert Consensus Statement Related to Chest CT Findings in COVID-19 Versus CO-RADS: Comparison of Reporting System Performance Among Chest Radiologists and End-User Preference.
O' Neill, Siobhan B; Byrne, Danielle; Müller, Nestor L; Jalal, Sabeena; Parker, William; Nicolaou, Savvas; Bilawich, Ana-Maria.
  • O' Neill SB; Department of Radiology, 8167Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Byrne D; 8166University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Müller NL; Department of Radiology, 8167Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Jalal S; 8166University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Parker W; Department of Radiology, 8167Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Nicolaou S; 8166University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Bilawich AM; Department of Radiology, 8167Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Can Assoc Radiol J ; 72(4): 806-813, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-901683
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

The RSNA expert consensus statement and CO-RADS reporting system assist radiologists in describing lung imaging findings in a standardized manner in patients under investigation for COVID-19 pneumonia and provide clarity in communication with other healthcare providers. We aim to compare diagnostic performance and inter-/intra-observer among chest radiologists in the interpretation of RSNA and CO-RADS reporting systems and assess clinician preference.

METHODS:

Chest CT scans of 279 patients with suspected COVID-19 who underwent RT-PCR testing were retrospectively and independently examined by 3 chest radiologists who assigned interpretation according to the RSNA and CO-RADS reporting systems. Inter-/intra-observer analysis was performed. Diagnostic accuracy of both reporting systems was calculated. 60 clinicians participated in a survey to assess end-user preference of the reporting systems.

RESULTS:

Both systems demonstrated almost perfect inter-observer agreement (Fleiss kappa 0.871, P < 0.0001 for RSNA; 0.876, P < 0.0001 for CO-RADS impressions). Intra-observer agreement between the 2 scoring systems using the equivalent categories was almost perfect (Fleiss kappa 0.90-0.92, P < 0.001). Positive predictive values were high, 0.798-0.818 for RSNA and 0.891-0.903 CO-RADS. Negative predictive value were similar, 0.573-0.585 for RSNA and 0.573-0.58 for CO-RADS. Specificity differed between the 2 systems, 68-73% for CO-RADS and 52-58% for RSNA with superior specificity of CO-RADS. Of 60 survey participants, the majority preferred the RSNA reporting system rather than CO-RADS for all options provided (66.7-76.7%; P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS:

RSNA and CO-RADS reporting systems are consistent and reproducible with near perfect inter-/intra-observer agreement and excellent positive predictive value. End-users preferred the reporting language in the RSNA system.
Subject(s)
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Radiology Information Systems / Radiologists / COVID-19 Type of study: Diagnostic study / Observational study / Prognostic study Limits: Humans Country/Region as subject: North America Language: English Journal: Can Assoc Radiol J Journal subject: Radiology Year: 2021 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: 0846537120968919

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Radiology Information Systems / Radiologists / COVID-19 Type of study: Diagnostic study / Observational study / Prognostic study Limits: Humans Country/Region as subject: North America Language: English Journal: Can Assoc Radiol J Journal subject: Radiology Year: 2021 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: 0846537120968919