Abstract
Background: Digital Radiography has revolutionised radiography practice in modern imaging departments. It has enabled immediate image preview, use of a wider dynamic range and the ability to apply special image processing techniques that enhance overall display quality of the image. Whilst the improved changes to workflow are well documented, the impact of the technology on radiography practise has not.
Purpose: To analyse the reasons for rejected images in a busy imaging department and investigate any variations in technique.
Material and Methods: Reject analysis was undertaken on 8 digital rooms within one Healthcare Trust in the UK over a 3 month period. The equipment included 3 different manufacturers, one of which was a hybrid system (the manufacturer of the detector differed from the manufacturer of the DR console). Further analysis of the images investigated the use of anatomical markers and collimation at the time of exposure. Descriptive statistics were calculated with the aid of Microsoft Excel and the results illustrated in the form of pie charts.
Results: Reject rate was found to be higher than the WHO recommendations of 5%, for conventional radiography and ranged from 5.9% to 12.13% across the 3 different manufacturers. The most common reason for rejecting an image was due to positioning error. Most repeated views were lateral wrists, lateral ankles, lateral knees, Y view of shoulder plus antero-posterior view of chests. Further analysis demonstrated that radiographers tend to add the anatomical marker at the post-processing stage rather than at the time of exposure and the use of routine collimation was lacking.
Conclusions: Continuing professional development should be supplemented by refresher courses on basic radiographic techniques and education as radiographer practical skills remain paramount to good clinical practice.
Purpose: To analyse the reasons for rejected images in a busy imaging department and investigate any variations in technique.
Material and Methods: Reject analysis was undertaken on 8 digital rooms within one Healthcare Trust in the UK over a 3 month period. The equipment included 3 different manufacturers, one of which was a hybrid system (the manufacturer of the detector differed from the manufacturer of the DR console). Further analysis of the images investigated the use of anatomical markers and collimation at the time of exposure. Descriptive statistics were calculated with the aid of Microsoft Excel and the results illustrated in the form of pie charts.
Results: Reject rate was found to be higher than the WHO recommendations of 5%, for conventional radiography and ranged from 5.9% to 12.13% across the 3 different manufacturers. The most common reason for rejecting an image was due to positioning error. Most repeated views were lateral wrists, lateral ankles, lateral knees, Y view of shoulder plus antero-posterior view of chests. Further analysis demonstrated that radiographers tend to add the anatomical marker at the post-processing stage rather than at the time of exposure and the use of routine collimation was lacking.
Conclusions: Continuing professional development should be supplemented by refresher courses on basic radiographic techniques and education as radiographer practical skills remain paramount to good clinical practice.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1 |
| Number of pages | 4 |
| Journal | Imaging and Therapy Practice |
| Early online date | 18 Oct 2018 |
| Publication status | Published online - 18 Oct 2018 |
Keywords
- Digital Radiography, practice, technique
