COMPARATIVE STUDY
EVALUATION STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
RESEARCH SUPPORT, N.I.H., EXTRAMURAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, U.S. GOV'T, P.H.S.
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

High discordance of chest x-ray and computed tomography for detection of pulmonary opacities in ED patients: implications for diagnosing pneumonia.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of chest x-ray (CXR) compared to computed tomography (CT) for detection of pulmonary opacities in adult emergency department (ED) patients.

METHODS: We conducted an observational cross-sectional study of adult patients presenting to 12 EDs in the United States from July 1, 2003, through November 30, 2006, who underwent both CXR and chest CT for routine clinical care. CXRs and CT scans performed on the same patient were matched. CXRs and CT scans were interpreted by attending radiologists and classified as containing pulmonary opacities if the final radiologist report noted opacity, infiltrate, consolidation, pneumonia, or bronchopneumonia. Using CT as a criterion standard, the diagnostic test characteristics of CXR to detect pulmonary opacities were calculated.

RESULTS: The study cohort included 3423 patients. Shortness of breath, chest pain and cough were the most common complaints, with 96.1% of subjects reporting at least one of these symptoms. Pulmonary opacities were visualized on 309 (9.0%) CXRs and 191 (5.6 %) CT scans. CXR test characteristics for detection of pulmonary opacities included: sensitivity 43.5% (95% CI, 36.4%-50.8%); specificity 93.0% (95% CI, 92.1%-93.9%); positive predictive value 26.9% (95% CI, 22.1%-32.2%); and negative predictive value 96.5% (95% CI, 95.8%-97.1%).

CONCLUSION: In this multicenter cohort of adult ED patients with acute cardiopulmonary symptoms, CXR demonstrated poor sensitivity and positive predictive value for detecting pulmonary opacities. Reliance on CXR to identify pneumonia may lead to significant rates of misdiagnosis.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app