Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences最新文献

Introduction: Diagnostic errors in the emergency departments can have major implications on patient outcomes. Preliminary Image Evaluation (PIE) is a brief comment written by a radiographer describing an acute or traumatic pathology on a radiograph and can be used to complement referrer's image interpretation in the absence of the radiologist report. Currently, no studies exist that focus their analysis on false-positive (FP) errors in PIE. The purpose of this study was to investigate the regions of the body that cause the most FP errors and recognise other areas in image interpretation that may need additional attention.

Methods: A longitudinal retrospective clinical audit was conducted to determine the accuracy of radiographer PIE's over 5 years from January 2016 to December 2020. PIE's were compared to the radiologist report to assess for diagnostic accuracy. FP and unsure errors were further categorised by anatomical region and age.

Results: Over this period, a sample size of 11,090 PIE audits were included in the study demonstrating an overall PIE accuracy of 87.7%. Foot, ankle and chest regions caused the most FP errors, while ankle, shoulder and elbow caused the most unsure cases. 76% of the unsure cases were negative for any pathology when compared to the radiologist report. The paediatric population accounted for 21.3% of FP cases and 33.6% of unsure cases.

Conclusion: Findings in this study should be used to tailor education specific to radiographer image interpretation. Improving radiography image interpretation skills can assist in improving referrer diagnostic accuracy, thus improving patient outcomes.

This is an exciting time to be working in healthcare and medical radiation sciences. This article discusses the potential benefits and risks of new technological interventions for patient benefit and outlines the need for co-production, governance and education to ensure these are used for advancing patients' well-being.

Introduction: The aim was to determine which immobilisation device improved inter-fraction reproducibly of pelvic tilt and required the least pre-treatment setup and planning interventions.

Methods: Sixteen patients were retrospectively reviewed, eight immobilised using the BodyFIX system (BodyFIX®, Elekta, Stockholm, Sweden) and eight using the Butterfly Board (BB) (Bionix Radiation Therapy, Toledo, OH, USA). The daily pre-treatment images were reviewed to assess setup variations between each patient and groups for pelvic tilt, pubic symphysis, sacral promontory and the fifth lumbar spine (L5).

Results: Compared with the planning CT, pelvic tilt for most patients was within ±2° using the BodyFIX and ± 4° for the BB. The Butterfly Board had a slightly higher variance both for patient-to-patient (standard deviation of the systematic error) and day-to-day error (standard deviation of the random error). Variance in position between individual patients and the two stabilisation devices were minimal in the anterior-posterior (AP) and superior-inferior (SI) direction for the pubic symphysis, sacral promontory and L5 spine. Re-imaged fractions due to pelvic tilt reduced by about half when BodyFIX was used (39.1% BB, 19.4% BodyFIX). One patient treated with the BB required a re-scan for pelvic tilt. Three patients required a re-scan for body contour variations (two using BodyFIX and one with the BB).

Conclusions: BodyFIX resulted in a more accurate inter-fraction setup and efficient treatment and is used as the standard stabilisation for gynaecological patients at our centre. It reduced the pelvic tilt variance and reduced the need for re-imaging pre-treatment by half.

Introduction: Renal Point-of-Care Ultrasound (POCUS) is a screening modality that aids in clinical decision-making for patients with suspected renal colic. This study intends to compare the accuracy and pertinence of sonographic findings obtained by a sonographer in a Basic Emergency Service (BES) with the imaging findings at the Referral Hospital (RH).

Methods: Thirty-one patients suspected of having renal pathology underwent initial sonography screening with POCUS at the BES and were subsequently referred to the RH for additional imaging examinations. The results of both examinations were compared to verify whether the findings from the BES were confirmed by the radiologist in the RH and to ensure that the patient referrals from BES to RH were appropriate.

Results: In our sample, the majority of patients (80%) exhibited varying degrees of pyelocaliceal distension, with nearly half (48%) patients presenting obstructions. A strong association between the sonographic findings in the BES and the RH was found in the variables 'Dilatation of pyelocaliceal system' (V = 0.895; P = 0.00), 'Simple cystic formation' (V = 0.878; P = 0.000), respectively. There was a statistically significant correlation between BES and RH findings, indicating a strong association between these two variables, respectively (k = 0.890; P = 0.000) and (k = 0.870; P = 0.000). There was also a strong statistically significant correlation in the ultrasonographic findings between BES and RH performers (k = 0.890; P = 0.000 and k = 0.870; P = 0.000). In this research, an achieved sensitivity of 96% and a specificity of 85% were demonstrated in the identification of pyelocaliceal dilatation.

Conclusion: Renal POCUS screening successfully detected abnormalities in the urinary system of patients suspected of having renal colic. The sonographic findings at the BES had a good correlation with the complementary imaging results obtained at the RH in Portugal. These results suggest that Radiographers/Sonographers can have an important role in the preliminary assessment of urgent renal pathology in remote areas, contributing to a correct referral and early treatment.

Maximise your CPD by reading the following selected article and answer the five questions. Please remember to self-claim your CPD and retain your supporting evidence. Answers will be available via the QR code and published in JMRS – Volume 71, Issue 4, December 2024.

Scan this QR code to find the answers.

Maximise your CPD by reading the following selected article and answer the five questions. Please remember to self-claim your CPD and retain your supporting evidence. Answers will be available via the QR code and published in JMRS – Volume 71, Issue 4 December 2024.

Scan this QR code to find the answers.

Evidence-based practice (EBP) has a vital role to play in improving outcomes for patients, organisations and individual practitioners. Unfortunately, within diagnostic radiography, literature consistently demonstrates that positive EBP is not the norm. This editorial discusses a strategy for fostering cultural change within the profession to improve EBP.