Type:
Educational Exhibit
Keywords:
Performed at one institution, Not applicable, Quality assurance, Outcomes, Education and training, Education, Diagnostic procedure, Decision analysis, MR, CT, Conventional radiography, Professional issues, Professional Issues
Authors:
�. Önder1, Y. YARAŞIR1, A. Azizova1, G. Durhan1, M. R. Onur2, O. M. Ariyürek1; 1Ankara/TR, 2Ankara, Ankara/TR
DOI:
10.26044/ecr2020/C-06328
Background
Radiological imaging is an essential part of patient management. Despite significant technological developments, radiologists still suffer from “errors” and “discrepancies”.
The term “error” is used, if there is no suspicion for what is “correct” and impossible to argue against while the term “discrepancy” stands for justifiable opinion differences in between colleagues.
Errors and discrepancies may cause direct or indirect, permanent or temporary harmful effects on patients due to false, missed or delayed diagnosis. However, radiological errors or discrepancies may not always alter patient management since erroneously defined radiological findings may be clinically insignificant or feed-backs from clinicians or other radiologists correct the errors or prevent discrepancies.
In the literature, classification of radiological errors and underlying bias have been discussed by different authors. Basically, radiological errors can be divided into two parts. "Perceptual errors" are more common and related to the fact that the present finding is not noticed. While "interpretative errors" are under the influence of cognitive biases that can contribute false reasoning.
According to the comprehensive classification system of Kim-Mansfield, there are 12 subgroups defined for error types. We will present cases related to those 12 types of radiological errors and underlying bias, after reviewing their classification.