Examining diagnostic variability among pediatric subspecialists using case examples of infant head injury

BACKGROUND

Although there is research regarding the diagnosis and timing of abusive head trauma, there remains practice variation among pediatric subspecialists.

OBJECTIVES

To examine diagnostic variability among pediatric subspecialists using case examples of infant head injury. Secondary objectives were timing variability among subspecialists, and diagnostic and timing variability among Child Abuse Pediatricians (CAPs).

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

Pediatric subspecialists were recruited from Child Abuse Pediatrics, Hospital Medicine, Emergency Medicine, Critical Care, and Neurosurgery to complete a research instrument. Participants qualified for the study if they evaluated at least 1 case of possible abusive head trauma during their career.

METHODS

This multi-institutional, mixed-methods study used a research instrument with 4 case examples of infant head injury: severe retinal hemorrhages (RH), mass-effect subdural hemorrhage (SDH), SDH membrane formation, and sepsis. The response selected by most CAPs was reference and compared across subspecialties and among CAPs using Chi-square or Fisher's exact tests. A Bonferroni correction (p < 0.01) was used for subspecialty comparisons.

RESULTS

There were 288 participants who completed at least 1 case example. Diagnostic variability was observed in all case examples. Significantly fewer Hospital Medicine (34.9 % vs. 57.9 %, p < 0.01), Emergency Medicine (28.0 % vs. 57.9 %, p < 0.0001), and Neurosurgery (24.0 % vs. 57.9 %, p < 0.01) participants selected the reference response for the mass-effect SDH case example. Timing variability was statistically significant for all case examples (p < 0.01). Significantly fewer CAPs aged 44-64 years selected the reference response for timing (p < 0.01) for the severe RH case example.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional peer review processes and consensus guidelines for challenging issues in abusive head trauma may be beneficial.

Clinical consequences of diagnostic variability in the histopathological evaluation of early rectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

In early rectal cancer, organ sparing treatment strategies such as local excision have gained popularity. The necessity of radical surgery is based on the histopathological evaluation of the local excision specimen. This study aimed to describe diagnostic variability between pathologists, and its impact on treatment allocation in patients with locally excised early rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with locally excised pT1-2 rectal cancer were included in this prospective cohort study. Both quantitative measures and histopathological risk factors (i.e. poor differentiation, deep submucosal invasion, and lymphatic- or venous invasion) were evaluated. Interobserver variability was reported by both percentages and Fleiss' Kappa- (ĸ) or intra-class correlation coefficients.

RESULTS

A total of 126 patients were included. Ninety-four percent of the original histopathological reports contained all required parameters. In 73 of the 126 (57.9%) patients, at least one discordant parameter was observed, which regarded histopathological risk factors for lymph node metastases in 36 patients (28.6%). Interobserver agreement among different variables varied between 74% and 95% or ĸ 0.530-0.962. The assessment of lymphovascular invasion showed discordances in 26% (ĸ = 0.530, 95% CI 0.375-0.684) of the cases. In fourteen (11%) patients, discordances led to a change in treatment strategy.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that there is substantial interobserver variability between pathologists, especially in the assessment of lymphovascular invasion. Pathologists play a key role in treatment allocation after local excision of early rectal cancer, therefore interobserver variability needs to be reduced to decrease the number of patients that are over- or undertreated.