Effect of training on resident inter-reader agreement with American College of Radiology Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System.
American College of Radiology Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System
Inter-reader agreement
Thyroid
Thyroid nodule
Ultrasound
Journal
World journal of radiology
ISSN: 1949-8470
Titre abrégé: World J Radiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101538184
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 Jan 2022
28 Jan 2022
Historique:
received:
12
10
2021
revised:
21
12
2021
accepted:
11
01
2022
entrez:
7
2
2022
pubmed:
8
2
2022
medline:
8
2
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The American College of Radiology Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (ACR TI-RADS) was introduced to standardize the ultrasound characterization of thyroid nodules. Studies have shown that ACR-TIRADS reduces unnecessary biopsies and improves consistency of imaging recommendations. Despite its widespread adoption, there are few studies to date assessing the inter-reader agreement amongst radiology trainees with limited ultrasound experience. We hypothesize that in PGY-4 radiology residents with no prior exposure to ACR TI-RADS, a statistically significant improvement in inter-reader reliability can be achieved with a one hour training session. To evaluate the inter-reader agreement of radiology residents in using ACR TI-RADS before and after training. A single center retrospective cohort study evaluating 50 thyroid nodules in 40 patients of varying TI-RADS levels was performed. Reference standard TI-RADS scores were established through a consensus panel of three fellowship-trained staff radiologists with between 1 and 14 years of clinical experience each. Three PGY-4 radiology residents (trainees) were selected as blinded readers for this study. Each trainee had between 4 to 5 mo of designated ultrasound training. No trainee had received specialized TI-RADS training prior to this study. Each of the readers independently reviewed the 50 testing cases and assigned a TI-RADS score to each case before and after TI-RADS training performed 6 wk apart. Fleiss kappa was used to measure the pooled inter-reader agreement. The relative diagnostic performance of readers, pre- and post-training, when compared against the reference standard. There were 33 females and 7 males with a mean age of 56.6 ± 13.6 years. The mean nodule size was 19 ± 14 mm (range from 5 to 63 mm). A statistically significant superior inter-reader agreement was found on the post-training assessment compared to the pre-training assessment for the following variables: 1. "Shape" (k of 0.09 [slight] pre-training Statistically significant improvement in inter-reader agreement in the assigning TI-RADS level and recommendations after training is observed. Our study supports the use of dedicated ACR TI-RADS training in radiology residents.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The American College of Radiology Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (ACR TI-RADS) was introduced to standardize the ultrasound characterization of thyroid nodules. Studies have shown that ACR-TIRADS reduces unnecessary biopsies and improves consistency of imaging recommendations. Despite its widespread adoption, there are few studies to date assessing the inter-reader agreement amongst radiology trainees with limited ultrasound experience. We hypothesize that in PGY-4 radiology residents with no prior exposure to ACR TI-RADS, a statistically significant improvement in inter-reader reliability can be achieved with a one hour training session.
AIM
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the inter-reader agreement of radiology residents in using ACR TI-RADS before and after training.
METHODS
METHODS
A single center retrospective cohort study evaluating 50 thyroid nodules in 40 patients of varying TI-RADS levels was performed. Reference standard TI-RADS scores were established through a consensus panel of three fellowship-trained staff radiologists with between 1 and 14 years of clinical experience each. Three PGY-4 radiology residents (trainees) were selected as blinded readers for this study. Each trainee had between 4 to 5 mo of designated ultrasound training. No trainee had received specialized TI-RADS training prior to this study. Each of the readers independently reviewed the 50 testing cases and assigned a TI-RADS score to each case before and after TI-RADS training performed 6 wk apart. Fleiss kappa was used to measure the pooled inter-reader agreement. The relative diagnostic performance of readers, pre- and post-training, when compared against the reference standard.
RESULTS
RESULTS
There were 33 females and 7 males with a mean age of 56.6 ± 13.6 years. The mean nodule size was 19 ± 14 mm (range from 5 to 63 mm). A statistically significant superior inter-reader agreement was found on the post-training assessment compared to the pre-training assessment for the following variables: 1. "Shape" (k of 0.09 [slight] pre-training
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Statistically significant improvement in inter-reader agreement in the assigning TI-RADS level and recommendations after training is observed. Our study supports the use of dedicated ACR TI-RADS training in radiology residents.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35126875
doi: 10.4329/wjr.v14.i1.19
pmc: PMC8788165
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
19-29Informations de copyright
©The Author(s) 2022. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.
Références
Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2012;22(3):276-82
pubmed: 23092060
Endocrine. 2020 Mar;67(3):643-650
pubmed: 31919768
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020 May;214(5):1152-1157
pubmed: 32097031
Abdom Radiol (NY). 2021 Oct;46(10):4967-4973
pubmed: 34185128
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2021 Jan;216(1):38-47
pubmed: 32603229
Educ Psychol Meas. 2016 Aug;76(4):609-637
pubmed: 29795880
Endocrine. 2020 Jan;67(1):143-154
pubmed: 31741167
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2018 Jul;211(1):162-167
pubmed: 29702015
JAMA Intern Med. 2013 Oct 28;173(19):1788-96
pubmed: 23978950
JAMA. 2017 Apr 4;317(13):1338-1348
pubmed: 28362912
Endocr Pract. 2016 May;22(5):622-39
pubmed: 27167915
Radiology. 2018 Jun;287(3):893-900
pubmed: 29465333
Endocr Connect. 2018 Jan;7(1):1-7
pubmed: 29196301
J Am Coll Radiol. 2017 May;14(5):587-595
pubmed: 28372962