摘要 :
OBJECTIVE: To determine if knee alignment measures differ between African Americans and Caucasians without radiographic knee osteoarthritis (rOA). METHODS: A single knee was randomly selected from 175 participants in the Johnston ...
展开
OBJECTIVE: To determine if knee alignment measures differ between African Americans and Caucasians without radiographic knee osteoarthritis (rOA). METHODS: A single knee was randomly selected from 175 participants in the Johnston County Osteoarthritis Project without rOA in either knee. Anatomic axis, condylar, tibial plateau, and condylar plateau angles were measured by 1 radiologist; means were compared and adjusted for age and body mass index (BMI). RESULTS: There were no significant differences in knee alignment measurements between Caucasians and African Americans among men or women. CONCLUSION: Observed differences in knee rOA occurrence between African Americans and Caucasians are not explained by differences in static knee alignment.
收起
摘要 :
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether specific findings determined to be critical and standard of care by expert witnesses in a legal case are identifiable by radiologists blinded to clinical outcome and li...
展开
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether specific findings determined to be critical and standard of care by expert witnesses in a legal case are identifiable by radiologists blinded to clinical outcome and litigation. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Images from six CT studies were sent to radiologists for interpretation. Two studies were performed for screening after major trauma, one of the cases being the subject of a settled legal action; three were randomly selected from studies performed in the evaluation of emergency department patients; and one was the control. The cases were selected to simulate a typical emergency department caseload. In the medicolegal case, four plaintiff expert witness radiologists had identified three findings in the CT study that were not described by the radiologist of record (primary reader). One of these findings was considered critical and was the basis for the legal case. RESULTS: Thirty-one radiologists participated in the study. The three findings made by the expert witnesses-T3 and T10 vertebral body fractures and 1-mm symmetric widening of the facet joints at T10-were made by none, 19 (61.3%), and none of the 31 radiologists in this study. CONCLUSION: Thirty-one radiologists who had no knowledge of the clinical outcome or litigation did not confirm the expert witness interpretation. This finding prompts questions about the current method of determining standard of care in legal cases, that is, use of paid medical expert witnesses. Our findings suggest that use of radiologists blinded to clinical outcome may be a more objective method of evaluating legal cases.
收起
原文获取