Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • Other Publications
    • abfm

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
American Board of Family Medicine
  • Other Publications
    • abfm
American Board of Family Medicine

American Board of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • JABFM on Bluesky
  • JABFM On Facebook
  • JABFM On Twitter
  • JABFM On YouTube
OtherEvidence-Based Clinical Practice

Radiographs in the Office: Is a Second Reading Always Needed?

Paul D. Smith, Jonathan Temte, John W. Beasley and Marlon Mundt
The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice July 2004, 17 (4) 256-263; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.17.4.256
Paul D. Smith
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jonathan Temte
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
John W. Beasley
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Marlon Mundt
MA, MS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    Figure 1.

    Study results.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Description of Radiographs Obtained by Primary Care Clinicians and Those for Which Radiologist Referral Reading Was Hypothetically Declined

    Body Area% of Total Radiographs% Referral Declined
    Chest29.4 (410)27.1 (111)
    Lower extremity27.7 (386)49.0 (189)
    Upper extremity23.9 (333)50.8 (169)
    Spine7.6 (106)30.2 (32)
    Abdomen3.9 (55)38.2 (21)
    Face/head3.1 (43)27.9 (12)
    Pelvis2.7 (37)29.7 (11)
    Rib/sternum/clavicle1.7 (23)34.8 (8)
    Total100 (1393)40 (553)
    • View popup
    Table 2.

    Percentage Concordance between Primary Care Clinician and Radiologist Readings, Referral Hypothetically Requested or Declined

    Body AreaN% Concordance All Readings% Concordance When Referral Requested% Concordance When Referral DeclinedP value*
    Chest41067.3 (276/410)62.5 (187/299)80.2 (89/111)<.001
    Lower extremity38678.0 (301/386)73.1 (144/197)83.1 (157/189).017
    Upper extremity33380.2 (267/333)72.6 (119/164)87.6 (148/169)<.001
    Both extremities71979.0 (568/719)72.9 (263/361)85.2 (305/358)<.001
    Spine10661.3 (65/106)60.8 (45/74)62.5 (20/32).869
    Abdomen5558.2 (32/55)52.9 (18/34)66.7 (14/21).305
    Face/head4369.8 (30/43)61.3 (19/31)91.7 (11/12).010
    Pelvis3762.2 (23/37)57.7 (15/26)72.7 (8/11).364
    Rib/sternum/clavicle2369.6 (16/23)66.7 (10/15)75.0 (6/8).670
    Total139372.5 (1010/1393)66.3 (557/840)81.9 (453/553)<.001
    • * χ2 test for difference in proportion of concordance in referral hypothetically requested or declined.

    • View popup
    Table 3.

    Changes in Clinical Care and Outcomes

    CaseBody AreaClinician ReadingRadiologist ReadingChange in CareOutcome
    1FootNormal2nd metatarsal stress fractureFollow-up visit scheduled*Continued pain at follow-up visit with normal radiographs 17 months later
    2HandNormalNondisplaced intra-articular fracture at base of 2nd metacarpalCast applied*Continued to have pain 9 months later despite appropriate care
    3Left ribs and PA chestNormalNondisplaced 5th, 6th and 7th rib fracturesNew prescription for pain medication*Pain improved at 5-week follow-up visit
    4FootNormalNondisplaced 5th proximal phalangeal shaft fractureGym excuse for 3 weeks*No further follow up documented
    5AnkleNormalImpacted calcaneus fractureRepeat radiographs*No calcaneal pain 9 weeks later
    6HandNormalPossible fracture of DIP dorsal spurAdditional office visit repeat radiographs*Although patient free of pain or swelling, repeat radiographs were obtained.
    7PA and lateral chestLung infiltrateNo acute pulmonary diseaseCancelled possible CT*Cough resolved
    8Lumbar spine, AP and lateral′No acute disease′Possible spondylolysis recommended additional radiographsAdditional radiographs†No change in care for back pain
    9AbdomenNormal6-mm nodule, base of lungAdditional radiographs†′Nodule′ not seen on repeat radiographs
    10PA and lateral chestNormalBilateral lung nodulesAdditional radiographs†One nodule was nipple, other was not identified
    11PA and lateral chestNormal1-cm lung noduleAdditional radiographs†No further evaluation
    12ShoulderNormalPossible mild acromioclavicular subluxation, recommended additional radiographsAdditional radiographs†Complete resolution of muscular shoulder strain, no change in care of shoulder
    13PA and lateral chestNormalPossible parenchymal opacityAdministrative effort to obtain old radiographs for comparison‡Possible parenchymal opacity was second rib
    14PA and lateral chestNormalPossible lung noduleAdministrative effort to obtain old radiographs for comparison‡Nodule stable for more than 2 years
    15Hand§NormalFracture at base of 5th proximal phalanxNone documentedUnknown
    16Thumb§NormalPossible nondisplaced Salter-Harris type II fracture of distal phalanxNone documentedUnknown
    17Ankle§NormalPossible medial malleolar avulsion fractureNone documentedUnknown
    18Thumb§NormalPossible nondisplaced Salter-Harris type II fracture of distal phalanxNone documentedUnknown
    • PA, posteroanterior.

    • * Presumed or documented 1 telephone contact for each case.

    • † Presumed or documented 2 telephone contacts for each case.

    • ‡ Presumed or documented 3 telephone contacts for each case.

    • § No follow up documented.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice: 17 (4)
The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice
Vol. 17, Issue 4
1 Jul 2004
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Board of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Radiographs in the Office: Is a Second Reading Always Needed?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Board of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Board of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
7 + 3 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Radiographs in the Office: Is a Second Reading Always Needed?
Paul D. Smith, Jonathan Temte, John W. Beasley, Marlon Mundt
The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice Jul 2004, 17 (4) 256-263; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.17.4.256

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Radiographs in the Office: Is a Second Reading Always Needed?
Paul D. Smith, Jonathan Temte, John W. Beasley, Marlon Mundt
The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice Jul 2004, 17 (4) 256-263; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.17.4.256
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgments
    • Notes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Patients with a Family History of Cancer: Identification and Management
  • Dietary Calcium Intake and Obesity
  • Postvasectomy Semen Analysis: Are Men Following Up?
Show more Evidence-Based Clinical Practice

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Authors & Reviewers

  • Info For Authors
  • Info For Reviewers
  • Submit A Manuscript/Review

Other Services

  • Get Email Alerts
  • Classifieds
  • Reprints and Permissions

Other Resources

  • Forms
  • Contact Us
  • ABFM News

© 2025 American Board of Family Medicine

Powered by HighWire