Assessment of the effect of a comprehensive chest radiograph deep learning model on radiologist reports and patient outcomes: a real-world observational study.

OBJECTIVES: Artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms have been developed to detect imaging features on chest X-ray (CXR) with a comprehensive AI model capable of detecting 124 CXR findings being recently developed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the real-world usefulness of the model as a diagnostic assistance device for radiologists. DESIGN: This prospective real-world multicentre study involved a group of radiologists using the model in their daily reporting workflow to report consecutive CXRs and recording their feedback on level of agreement with the model findings and whether this significantly affected their reporting. SETTING: The study took place at radiology clinics and hospitals within a large radiology network in Australia between November and December 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Eleven consultant diagnostic radiologists of varying levels of experience participated in this study. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of CXR cases where use of the AI model led to significant material changes to the radiologist report, to patient management, or to imaging recommendations. Additionally, level of agreement between radiologists and the model findings, and radiologist attitudes towards the model were assessed. RESULTS: Of 2972 cases reviewed with the model, 92 cases (3.1%) had significant report changes, 43 cases (1.4%) had changed patient management and 29 cases (1.0%) had further imaging recommendations. In terms of agreement with the model, 2569 cases showed complete agreement (86.5%). 390 (13%) cases had one or more findings rejected by the radiologist. There were 16 findings across 13 cases (0.5%) deemed to be missed by the model. Nine out of 10 radiologists felt their accuracy was improved with the model and were more positive towards AI poststudy. CONCLUSIONS: Use of an AI model in a real-world reporting environment significantly improved radiologist reporting and showed good agreement with radiologists, highlighting the potential for AI diagnostic support to improve clinical practice.

Hot tips on hot tips: technical problems with percutaneous insertion of a microwave antenna through rigid tissue.

We report an instance of microwave antenna breakage upon insertion through rigid costal cartilage and tip dislodgement during withdrawal of the antenna. Furthermore, we highlight antenna incompatibility with certain coaxial needles. Given the complexity and fragility of microwave antennas, it is not recommended to insert them through rigid tissue such as cartilage or calcified pleural plaques.

Is it possible to eliminate patient identification errors in medical imaging?

PURPOSE: The aim of this article is to review a system that validates and documents the process of ensuring the correct patient, correct site and side, and correct procedure (commonly referred to as the 3 C's) within medical imaging. METHODS: A 4-step patient identification and procedure matching process was developed using health care and aviation models. The process was established in medical imaging departments after a successful interventional radiology pilot program. The success of the project was evaluated using compliance audit data, incident reporting data before and after the implementation of the process, and a staff satisfaction survey. RESULTS: There was 95% to 100% verification of site and side and 100% verification of correct patient, procedure, and consent. Correct patient data and side markers were present in 82% to 95% of cases. The number of incidents before and after the implementation of the 3 C's was difficult to assess because of a change in reporting systems and incident underreporting. More incidents are being reported, particularly "near misses." All near misses were related to incorrect patient identification stickers being placed on request forms. The majority of staff members surveyed found the process easy (55.8%), quick (47.7%), relevant (51.7%), and useful (60.9%). CONCLUSION: Although identification error is difficult to eliminate, practical initiatives can engender significant systems improvement in complex health care environments.