TY - JOUR
T1 - Computed tomography in ventral hernia diagnosis
T2 - have we improved? A quality improvement initiative
AU - Holihan, Julie L.
AU - Cherla, Deepa
AU - Blair, Katherine J.
AU - Chua, Steven S.
AU - Hasapes, Joseph P.
AU - Matta, Eduardo J.
AU - Shiralkar, Kaustubh G.
AU - Surabhi, Venkateswar R.
AU - Tammisetti, Varaha S.
AU - Ko, Tien C.
AU - Liang, Mike K.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2018/4
Y1 - 2018/4
N2 - Background Previous studies suggest that agreement between readers of computed tomography (CT) scans for the diagnosis of a ventral hernia (VH) is poor (32% agreement, κ = 0.21). Recommendations were developed by surgeons and radiologists after determining common reasons for disagreement among CT reviewers; however, the long-term effect of adoption of these recommendations has not been assessed. The aim of this quality improvement (QI) project was to determine whether the incorporation of recommendations developed by surgeons and radiologists improves agreement among reviewers of CT scans in diagnosing a VH. Methods A prospective cohort of patients, with a CT scan of the abdomen and pelvis in the past 1 y, attending a surgery clinic at a single institution was enrolled. Enrolled subjects underwent a standardized physical examination by a trained hernia surgeon to determine the likelihood of a clinical VH (no, indeterminate, or yes). The QI intervention was the distribution and implementation of previously described recommendations. After a year of intervention, independent radiologists assessed patients' CT scans for the presence or absence of a VH. Percent agreement and kappa were calculated to determine interobserver reliability. In-person discussion on scans with disagreement was held, and the results were used as a “gold standard” to calculate sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values for CT scan diagnosis of a VH. Results A total of 79 patients were included in the study. After QI intervention, seven radiologists agreed on 43% of the scans, and κ was 0.50 (P < 0.001). Agreement was highest among patients with a high clinical likelihood of a VH and lowest among patients with an indeterminate clinical likelihood. Sensitivity and specificity were 0.369 and 0.833, respectively. Conclusions After the implementation of recommendations, there is improved agreement among radiologists reading CT scans for the diagnosis of a VH. However, there is substantial room for improvement, and CT scans for the diagnosis of VH is not ready for widespread use.
AB - Background Previous studies suggest that agreement between readers of computed tomography (CT) scans for the diagnosis of a ventral hernia (VH) is poor (32% agreement, κ = 0.21). Recommendations were developed by surgeons and radiologists after determining common reasons for disagreement among CT reviewers; however, the long-term effect of adoption of these recommendations has not been assessed. The aim of this quality improvement (QI) project was to determine whether the incorporation of recommendations developed by surgeons and radiologists improves agreement among reviewers of CT scans in diagnosing a VH. Methods A prospective cohort of patients, with a CT scan of the abdomen and pelvis in the past 1 y, attending a surgery clinic at a single institution was enrolled. Enrolled subjects underwent a standardized physical examination by a trained hernia surgeon to determine the likelihood of a clinical VH (no, indeterminate, or yes). The QI intervention was the distribution and implementation of previously described recommendations. After a year of intervention, independent radiologists assessed patients' CT scans for the presence or absence of a VH. Percent agreement and kappa were calculated to determine interobserver reliability. In-person discussion on scans with disagreement was held, and the results were used as a “gold standard” to calculate sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values for CT scan diagnosis of a VH. Results A total of 79 patients were included in the study. After QI intervention, seven radiologists agreed on 43% of the scans, and κ was 0.50 (P < 0.001). Agreement was highest among patients with a high clinical likelihood of a VH and lowest among patients with an indeterminate clinical likelihood. Sensitivity and specificity were 0.369 and 0.833, respectively. Conclusions After the implementation of recommendations, there is improved agreement among radiologists reading CT scans for the diagnosis of a VH. However, there is substantial room for improvement, and CT scans for the diagnosis of VH is not ready for widespread use.
KW - Computed tomography
KW - Hernia
KW - Interobserver reliability
KW - Ventral
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85038229363&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85038229363&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jss.2017.11.055
DO - 10.1016/j.jss.2017.11.055
M3 - Article
C2 - 29506858
AN - SCOPUS:85038229363
SN - 0022-4804
VL - 224
SP - 97
EP - 101
JO - Journal of Surgical Research
JF - Journal of Surgical Research
ER -