2021•Frontiers in MedicineOpen access

The Diagnostic Yield of the Multidisciplinary Discussion in Patients With COVID-19 Pneumonia

Fiorella Calabrese, Federica Pezzuto, Chiara Giraudo, Luca Vedovelli, Francesco Fortarezza, Claudia Del Vecchio, Francesca Lunardi, Anna Sara Fraia, Elisabetta Cocconcelli, Stefania Edith Vuljan, Darío Gregori, Andrea Crisanti, Elisabetta Balestro, Paolo Spagnolo

Open full text 5 citations

Abstract

Purpose: The hypothesis of the study was that a multidisciplinary approach involving experienced specialists in diffuse parenchymal lung disease might improve the diagnosis of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods: Two pulmonologists, two radiologists, and two pathologists reviewed 27 patients affected by severe COVID-19 pneumonia as the main diagnosis made by non-pulmonologists. To evaluate whether the contribution of specialists, individually and/or in combination, might modify the original diagnosis, a three-step virtual process was planned. The whole lung examination was considered the gold standard for the final diagnosis. The probability of a correct diagnosis was calculated using a model based on generalized estimating equations. The effectiveness of a multidisciplinary diagnosis was obtained by comparing diagnoses made by experienced pulmonologists with those made by non-pulmonologists. Results: In 19% of cases, the diagnosis of COVID-19-related death was mainly incorrect. The probability of a correct diagnosis increased strikingly from an undedicated clinician to an expert specialist. Every single specialist made significantly more correct diagnoses than any non-pulmonologist. The highest level of accuracy was achieved by the combination of 3 expert specialists (p = 0.0003). Conclusion: The dynamic interaction between expert specialists may significantly improve the diagnostic confidence and management of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Purpose: The hypothesis of the study was that a multidisciplinary approach involving experienced specialists in diffuse parenchymal lung disease might improve the diagnosis of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods: Two pulmonologists, two radiologists, and two pathologists reviewed 27 patients affected by severe COVID-19 pneumonia as the main diagnosis made by non-pulmonologists. To evaluate whether the contribution of specialists, individually and/or in combination, might modify the original diagnosis, a three-step virtual process was planned. The whole lung examination was considered the gold standard for the final diagnosis. The probability of a correct diagnosis was calculated using a model based on generalized estimating equations. The effectiveness of a multidisciplinary diagnosis was obtained by comparing diagnoses made by experienced pulmonologists with those made by non-pulmonologists. Results: In 19% of cases, the diagnosis of COVID-19-related death was mainly incorrect. The probability of a correct diagnosis increased strikingly from an undedicated clinician to an expert specialist. Every single specialist made significantly more correct diagnoses than any non-pulmonologist. The highest level of accuracy was achieved by the combination of 3 expert specialists (p = 0.0003). Conclusion: The dynamic interaction between expert specialists may significantly improve the diagnostic confidence and management of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 5 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Purpose: The hypothesis of the study was that a multidisciplinary approach involving experienced specialists in diffuse parenchymal lung disease might improve the diagnosis of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods: Two pulmonologists, two radiologists, and two pathologists reviewed 27 patients affected by severe COVID-19 pneumonia as the main diagnosis made by non-pulmonologists. To evaluate whether the contribution of specialists, individually and/or in combination, might modify the original diagnosis, a three-step virtual process was planned. The whole lung examination was considered the gold standard for the final diagnosis. The probability of a correct diagnosis was calculated using a model based on generalized estimating equations. The effectiveness of a multidisciplinary diagnosis was obtained by comparing diagnoses made by experienced pulmonologists with those made by non-pulmonologists. Results: In 19% of cases, the diagnosis of COVID-19-related death was mainly incorrect. The probability of a correct diagnosis increased strikingly from an undedicated clinician to an expert specialist. Every single specialist made significantly more correct diagnoses than any non-pulmonologist. The highest level of accuracy was achieved by the combination of 3 expert specialists (p = 0.0003). Conclusion: The dynamic interaction between expert specialists may significantly improve the diagnostic confidence and management of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.

Key concepts: Pulmonologists, Pulmonologist, Medical diagnosis, Medicine, Pneumonia, Gold standard (test), Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), Multidisciplinary approach

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Diagnostic Yield of the Multidisciplinary Discussion in Patients With COVID-19 Pneumonia — Research Paper | ScholarLens