RADIOLOGIC INTERPRETATION BY FAMILY PHYSICIANS IN AN OFFICE PRACTICE SETTING

Background. Radiology is an integral part of the office practice of ma ny family physicians. Nevertheless, data are sparse on the performance of family physicians in this endeavor. This study investigated the pe rformance of family physicians at interpreting radiographs ordered in a free-standing family practice office. Methods. A consecutive series of radiographic studies performed at a family practice office during a 5-year period was surveyed. All radiographic studies included in this analysis (N=1674) were separately interpreted by the family physician ordering the study and an overreading radiologist. If the interpretat ions agreed, the studies were accepted as having been correctly interp reted, Cases in which the interpretations disagreed were reexamined. R esults. Family physicians correctly interpreted 92.4% of the radiograp hic studies (95% confidence interval, 91.0 to 93.6). Their accuracy wi th extremity films (96.0%) ws significantly higher than their accuracy with chest films (59.3%, P<.001). Family physicians were more likely to correctly interpret normal films (95.2%) than abnormal ones (85.9%, P<.001). Thirty-five percent of the cases in which there were differe nces between family physician and radiologist interpretations were cor rectly interpreted by family physicians. Conclusions. Family physician s showed a high degree of accuracy in radiologic interpretation in an office setting. Chest films were inherently more difficult to interpre t than extremity films. Because correct interpretation depends on body part examined and the prevalence of disease, the performance of famil y physicians will probably vary in different practice settings.