Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Categories of Errors in Imaging

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Errors in Imaging

  • 749 Accesses

Abstract

The various errors can be assigned to misperception, misinterpretation, blind spots, omission, poor expression, delayed delivery of the report, or miscommunication with the referring physician. Failure to detect the abnormality is the most frequent error type. Misinterpretation of a finding leads to underdiagnosis or overdiagnosis. Blind spots are anatomic areas that do not usually flag our attention, becoming thus a convergence point for biases, perception errors, and judgment errors. Faults of omission occur (a) when we abandon our visual search before collecting all key, significant, or pertinent findings, (b) when we rush though the patient’s prior imaging and prior reports, and (c) when we do not ask for assistance or verification when reading a case that challenges our comfort zone. The term “expression errors” means dictating a suboptimal report, a topic that is covered in great detail in Chap. 4. Verbal and timely communication with the referring physician is indicated for all significant findings, a topic also covered extensively in Chap. 4.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The male gender is used generically and it includes the female gender.

References

  1. Brook OR, O’Connell AM, Thornton E, Eisenberg RL, Mendiratta-Lala M, Kruskal JB. Quality initiatives: anatomy and pathophysiology of errors occurring in clinical radiology practice. Radiographics. 2010;30:1401–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bruno MA, Walker EA, Abujudeh HH. Understanding and confronting our mistakes: the epidemiology of error in radiology and strategies for error reduction. Radiographics. 2015;35:1668–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kim YW, Mansfield LT. Fool me twice: delayed diagnoses in radiology with emphasis on perpetuated errors. AJR. 2014;202:465–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Renfrew DL, Franken EA Jr, Berbaum KS, Weigelt FH, Abu-Yousef MM. Error in radiology: classification and lessons in 182 cases presented at a problem case conference. Radiology. 1992;183:145–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Sabih DE, Sabih A, Sabih Q, Khan AN. Image perception and interpretation of abnormalities; can we believe our eyes? Can we do something about it? Insights Imaging. 2011;2:47–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Pinto A, Brunese L. Spectrum of diagnostic errors in radiology. World J Radiol. 2010;2:377–83.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Provenzale JM, Kranz PG. Understanding errors in diagnostic radiology: proposal of a classification scheme and application to emergency radiology. Emerg Radiol. 2011;18:403–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Chrysikopoulos H. Basics of MR examinations and interpretation. In: Clinical MR imaging and physics: a tutorial. Heidelberg: Springer; 2009. p. 109–64.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kabadi SJ, Krishmaraj A. Strategies for improving the value of the radiology report: a retrospective analysis of errors in formally over-read studies. J Am Coll Radiol. 2017;14:459–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Berlin L. Radiologic errors, past, present and future. Diagnosis. 2014;1:79–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. McCreadie G, Oliver TB. Eight CT lessons that we learned the hard way: an analysis of current patterns of radiological error and discrepancy with particular emphasis on CT. Clin Radiol. 2009;64:491–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Donald JJ, Barnard SA. Common patterns in 558 diagnostic radiology errors. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2012;56:173–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Funaki B, Szymski G, Rosenblum J. Significant on-call misses by radiology residents interpreting computed tomographic studies: perception versus cognition. Emerg Radiol. 1997;4:290–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Owens EJ, Taylor NR, Howlett DC. Perceptual type error in everyday practice. Clin Radiol. 2016;71:593–601.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rosenkrantz AB, Bansal NK. Diagnostic errors in abdominopelvic CT interpretation: characterization based on report addenda. Abdom Radiol. 2016;41:1793–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Rubin GD, Roos JE, Tall M, et al. Characterizing search, recognition and decision in the detection of lung nodules on CT scans: elucidation with eye tracking. Radiology. 2015;274:276–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Drew T, Vo MLH, Olwal A, Jacobson F, Seltzer SS. Scanners and drillers: characterizing expert visual search through volumetric images. J Vis. 2013;13:1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Bertram R, Helle L, Kaakinene JK, Svedstrom E. The effect of expertise on eye movement behavior in medical image perception. PLoS One. 2013;8:e66169. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0066169.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Matsumoto H, Terao Y, Yugeta A, et al. Where do neurologists look when viewing brain CT images? An eye-tracking study involving stroke cases. PLoS One. 2011;6:e28928. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0028928.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Wormans D, Ludwig K, Beyer F, Heidel W, Diederich S. Detection of pulmonary nodules at multirow-detector CT: effectiveness of double reading to improve sensitivity at standard-dose and low-dose chest CT. Eur Radiol. 2005;15:14–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Fitzgerald R. Radiological error: analysis, standard setting, targeted instruction and teamworking. Eur Radiol. 2005;15:1760–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Bruno MA. Primum non nocere: a few words on the primacy of patient safety. In: Abujudeh HH, Bruno MA, editors. Quality and safety in radiology. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012. p. 26–8.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Gunderman RB, Nyce JM. The tyranny of accuracy in radiologic education. Radiology. 2002;222:297–300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Robinson PJ. Radiology’s Achilles’ heel: error and variation in the interpretation of the roentgen image. Br J Radiol. 1997;70:1085–98.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Manning DJ, Barker-Mill SC, Donovan T, Crawford T. Time-dependent observer errors in pulmonary nodule detection. Br J Radiol. 2006;79:342–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Pinto A, Scuderi MG, Daniele S. Errors in radiology: definition and classification. In: Romano L, Pinto A, editors. Errors in radiology. Heidelberg: Springer; 2012. p. 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Berlin L. Medicolegal-malpractice and ethical issues in radiology. Overdiagnosis, false-positive findings, and malpractice. AJR. 2014;203:W549.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Berlin L. Screening for early detection of breast cancer: overdiagnosis versus public education. Radiology. 2014;270:310–1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Newman-Toker D. A unified conceptual model for diagnostic errors: underdiagnosis, overdiagnosis, and misdiagnosis. Diagnosis. 2014;1:43–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Garland LH. Studies on the accuracy of diagnostic procedures. Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nuc Med. 1959;82:25–38.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Zwaan L, Singh H. The challenges in defining and measuring diagnostic error. Diagnosis. 2015;2:97–103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Jenniskens K, de Groot JAH, Reitsma JB, Moons KGM, Hooft L, Naaktgeboren CA. Overdiagnosis across medical disciplines: a scoping review. BMJ Open. 2017;7(12):e018448. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018448.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. de Groot JAH, Naaktgeboren CA, Reitsma JB, Moons KGM. Methodological approaches to evaluating new highly sensitive diagnostic tests: avoiding overdiagnosis. CMAJ. 2017;189:E64–8. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.150999.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Merritt BA, Henry TS, Cha S, et al. Tailoring radiology resident education using aggregated missed-cases data. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018;15:1013–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Wiener R, Schwartz L, Woloshin S. Time trends in pulmonary embolism in the United States: evidence of overdiagnosis. Arch Intern Med. 2011;171:831–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Hendrick RE. Obligate overdiagnosis due to mammographic screening: a direct estimate for US women. Radiology. 2018;287:391–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Monticciolo DL, Helvie MA, Hendrick RE. Current issues in the overdiagnosis and overtreatment of breast cancer. AJR. 2018;210:285–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Javitt MC. Breast cancer screening - what now, and what next? AJR. 2018;210:239–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. de Groot PM, Carter BW, Abbott GF, Wu CC. Pitfalls in chest radiographic interpretation: blind spots. Sem Roentgenol. 2015;50:197–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Horton KM, Johnson PT, Fishman EK. MDCT of the abdomen: common misdiagnoses at a busy academic center. AJR. 2010;194:660–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Wu CC, Korashadi L, Abbott GF, Gilman MD. Common blind spots on chest CT: where are they all hiding? Part 1 – airways, lungs and pleura. AJR. 2013;201:W533–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Wu CC, Korashadi L, Abbott GF, Shepard JAO. Common blind spots on chest CT: where are they all hiding? Part 2, extrapulmonary structures. AJR. 2013;201:W671–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Rinaldi MF, Bartalena T, Gianneli G, et al. Incidental lung nodules on CT examinations of the abdomen: prevalence and reporting rates in the PACS era. Eur J Radiol. 2010;74:e84–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Siewert B, Sosna J, McNamara A, Raptopoulos V, Kruskal JB. Missed lesions at abdominal oncologic CT: lessons learned from quality assurance. Radiographics. 2008;28:623–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Bahrami S, Yim CM. Quality initiatives. Blind spots at brain imaging. Radiographics. 2009;29:1877–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Tchoyoson CC, Nadarajah M. System-based imaging pitfalls: brain. In: Peh WGC, editor. Pitfalls in diagnostic radiology. Heidelberg: Springer; 2015. p. 217–45.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Pickhardt PJ, Bhalla S, Balfe DM. Acquired gastrointestinal fistulas: classification, etiologies, and imaging evaluation. Radiology. 2002;224:9–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Kawashima A, Sandler CM, Corl FM, West OC, et al. Imaging of renal trauma: a comprehensive review. Radiographics. 2001;21:557–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Caiafa RO, Vinuesa AS, Izquierdo RS, Brufau BP, Colella JRA, Molina CN. Retroperitoneal fibrosis: role of imaging in diagnosis and follow-up. Radiographics. 2013;33:535–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Hofman PAM, Fitt GJ, Harvey AS, Kuzniecky RI, Jackson G. Bottom-of-sulcus dysplasia: imaging features. AJR. 2011;196:881–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Tomura N, Uemura K, Inugami A, Fujita H, Higano S, Shishido F. Early CT sign in cerebral infarction: obscuration of the lentiform nucleus. Radiology. 1988;168:463–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Dankbbar JW, Pameijer FA, Hendrikse J, Schmalfuss IM. Easily detected signs of perineural tumor spread in head and neck cancer. Insights Imaging. 2018;9:1089–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Berlin L. Medicolegal-malpractice and ethical issues in radiology. CT scout views and standard of care. AJR. 2014;203:W741.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Pinto A, Reginelli A, Pinto F, et al. Errors in imaging patients in the emergency setting. Br J Radiol. 2016;89:20150914. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20150914.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Berlin L. Medicolegal-malpractice and ethical issues in radiology. Should CT and MRI scout images be interpreted? AJR. 2017;209:W43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Eisenberg RL. Should “mature” radiologists be put out to pasture? Radiographics. 2016;36:937–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Khan R, Nael K, Erly W. Acute stroke imaging: what clinicians need to know. Am J Med. 2013;126:379–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Vancauwenberghe T, Snoeckx A, Vanbeckevoort D, Dymarkowski S, Vanhoenacker FM. Imaging of the spleen: what the clinician needs to know. Singap Med J. 2015;56:133–44.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Golfarb CA, Yin Y, Gilula LA, Fisher AJ, Boyer MI. Wrist fractures: what the clinician wants to know. Radiology. 2001;219:11–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Morag Y, Jacobson JA, Miller B, de Maeseneer M, Girish G, Jamadar D. MR imaging of rotator cuff injury: what the clinician needs to know. Radiographics. 2006;26:1045–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Marshall RA, Weaver ML, Sodickson A, Khurana B. Periprosthetic fractures in the emergency department: what the orthopedic surgeon wants to know. Radiographics. 2017;37:1202–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Kumbhar SS, O’Malley RB, Robinson TJ, et al. Why thyroid surgeons are frustrated with radiologists: lessons learned from pre- and postoperative US. Radiographics. 2016;36:2141–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Wieschhoff GG, Sheehan SE, Wortman JR, et al. Traumatic finger injuries: what the orthopedic surgeon wants to know. Radiographics. 2016;36:1106–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Sandstorm CK, Kennedy SA, Gross JA. Acute shoulder trauma: what the surgeon wants to know. Radiographics. 2015;35:475–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Lee SC, Jain PA, Jethwa SC, Tripathy D, Yamashita MW. Radiologists’ role in breast cancer staging: providing key information for clinicians. Radiographics. 2014;34:330–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Khurana B, Sheehan SE, Sodickson A, Bono CM, Harris MB. Traumatic thoracolumbar spine injuries: what the spine surgeon wants to know. Radiographics. 2013;33:2031–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Sheehan SE, Dyer GS, Sodickson AD, Patel KI, Khurana B. Traumatic elbow injuries: what the orthopedic surgeon wants to know. Radiographics. 2013;33:869–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Zwaan L. The critical step to reduce diagnostic errors in medicine: addressing the limitations of human information processing. Diagnosis. 2014;1:139–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Allen CB, Tirman P, Jennings Clingan M, Manny J, Del Gaizo AJ, Leyendecker JR. Characterizing solid renal neoplasms with MRI in adults. Abdom Imaging. 2014;39:358–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Vendrami CL, Villavicencio CP, DeJulio TJ, et al. Differentiation of solid renal tumors with multiparametric MR imaging. Radiographics. 2017;37:2026–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Bosmans JM, Peremans L, De Schepper AM, Duyck PO, Parizel PM. How do referring clinicians want the radiologists to report? Suggestions from the COVER survey. Insights Imaging. 2011;2:577–84.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. Berbaum KS, Franken EA, Dorfman DD, Lueben KR. Influence of clinical history on perception of abnormalities in pediatric radiographs. Acad Radiol. 1994;1:217–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. White K, Berbaum K, Smith WL. The role of previous radiographs and reports in the interpretation of current radiographs. Investig Radiol. 1994;29:263–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Berlin L. Comparing new radiographs with those obtained previously. AJR. 1999;172:3–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Berlin L. Must new radiographs be compared with all previous radiographs, or only with the most recently obtained radiograph? AJR. 2000;174:611–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Hunter TB, Boyle RR. The value of reading the previous radiology report. AJR. 1988;150:697–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Aideyan UO, Berbaum K, Smith WL. Influence of prior radiologic information on the interpretation of radiographic examinations. Acad Radiol. 1995;2:205–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Leslie A, Jones AJ, Goddard PR. The influence of clinical information on the reporting of CT by radiologists. Br J Radiol. 2000;73:1052–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Gunderman RB, Phillips MD, Cohen MD. Improving clinical histories on radiology requisitions. Acad Radiol. 2001;8:299–303.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Berbaum KS, Franken EA. Commentary: does clinical history affect perception? Acad Radiol. 2006;13:402–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Mullins ME, Lev MH, Schellingerhout D, Koroshetz WJ, Gonzalez RG. Influence of availability of clinical history on detection of early stroke using unenhanced CT and diffusion-weighted MR imaging. AJR. 2002;179:223–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Doshi AM, Kiritsy M, Rosenkrantz AB. Strategies for avoiding recommendations for additional imaging through a comprehensive comparison with prior studies. J Am Coll Radiol. 2015;12:657–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Loy CT, Irwig L. Accuracy of diagnostic tests read with and without clinical information: a systematic review. JAMA. 2004;292:1602–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. European Society of Radiology. ESR communication guidelines for radiologists. Insights Imaging. 2013;4:143–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Graber ML. Taking steps toward a safer future: measures to promote timely and accurate medical diagnosis. Am J Med. 2008;121(suppl 5):S43–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Society of Thoracic Radiology Online Educational Resources. thoracicrad.org/?portofolio=education

  87. Journal of Thoracic Imaging. Residents and fellows corner. journals.lww.com/thoracicimaging/Pages/residentscorner.aspx

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CT & MR Division, Eurodiagnosis Imaging Center, Corfu, Greece

    Haris Chrysikopoulos

Authors
  1. Haris Chrysikopoulos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Chrysikopoulos, H. (2020). Categories of Errors in Imaging. In: Errors in Imaging. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21103-5_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21103-5_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-21102-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-21103-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation