Misinterpretation of radiological investigations forms an important contributing factor to diagnostic errors. Hence, double reading reduces interpretation errors and increases sensitivity. Studies report that level of error for clinically significant or major error in radiology is in the range 2-20% depending on the radiological investigations for quality assurance by double reading. The current publication synopsis article tries to estimate the proportion of radiology reports that were changed during double reading and assess the potential clinical impact of these changes in an observational study.
Misinterpretation of radiological studies may have serious clinical consequences. An autopsy study of patients dying in hospital showed that radiological misinterpretation caused 8%, and contributed to another 33% of diagnostic errors in patients with relevant imaging. Double reading is a…
