|
|||||
|
|
Computed tomography colonography: Radiographer independent preliminary clinical evaluation for intraluminal pathology |
|
| Institution: | 1. Taunton and Somerset NHS Foundation Trust, Musgrove Park Hospital, Taunton, Somerset, TA1 5DA, UK;2. University of Exeter College of Medicine and Health, St Luke''s Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK;1. Directorate of Radiography, University of Salford, UK;2. Department of Radiology, Royal Blackburn Hospital, UK;3. Department of Radiology, Tameside General Hospital, UK;4. Rothband, Burnley, UK;1. Pacific International Hospital, PO Box 6103, Boroko, NCD, Papua New Guinea;2. University of Papua New Guinea, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Discipline of Medical Imaging, UPNG Taurama Campus, PO Box, 5623, Boroko, NCD, Papua New Guinea;3. School of Dentistry & Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Charles Sturt University, Locked Bag 588, Building 30, Boorooma Street, Wagga Wagga, NSW, 2678, Australia;1. University of Salford, L611, Allerton Building, M5 4WT, UK;2. University of Salford, UK;3. Interim Director Radiography, University of Salford, UK;1. School of Allied Health Professions, Canterbury Christ Church University, Kent, UK;2. Nuclear Medicine, Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust, Maidstone, UK |
| Abstract: | IntroductionWe evaluated the reporting competency of radiographers providing preliminary clinical evaluations (PCE) for intraluminal pathology of computed tomography colonography (CTC).MethodFollowing validation of a suitable tool, audit was undertaken to compare radiographer PCE against radiology reports. A database was designed to capture radiographer and radiologist report data. The radiographer's PCE of intraluminal pathology was given a score, the “pathology discrepancy and significance” (PDS) score based on the pathology present, any discrepancy between the PCE and the final report, and the significance of that discrepancy on the management of the patient. Agreement was assessed using percentage agreement and Kappa coefficient. Significant discrepancies between findings were compared against endoscopy and pathology reports.ResultsThere was agreement or insignificant discrepancy between the radiographer PCE and the radiology report for 1736 patients, representing 97.0% of cases. There was a significant discrepancy between findings in 2.8% of cases and a major discrepancy recorded for 0.2% of cases. There was a 98.4% agreement in the 229 cases where significant pathologies were present.ConclusionFrom a database of 1815 studies acquired over three years and representing work done in a clinical environment, this study indicates a potential for trained radiographers to provide a PCE of intraluminal pathology. |
| Keywords: | Computed tomography colonography preliminary clinical evaluation radiographer reporting colorectal cancer radiographer led CTC service BCSP"} {"#name":"keyword" "$":{"id":"kwrd0040"} "$$":[{"#name":"text" "_":"bowel cancer screening programme CAD"} {"#name":"keyword" "$":{"id":"kwrd0050"} "$$":[{"#name":"text" "_":"computer aided detection CRC"} {"#name":"keyword" "$":{"id":"kwrd0060"} "$$":[{"#name":"text" "_":"colorectal cancer CTC"} {"#name":"keyword" "$":{"id":"kwrd0070"} "$$":[{"#name":"text" "_":"computed tomography colonography FIT"} {"#name":"keyword" "$":{"id":"kwrd0080"} "$$":[{"#name":"text" "_":"faecal immunochemical test OC"} {"#name":"keyword" "$":{"id":"kwrd0090"} "$$":[{"#name":"text" "_":"optical colonoscopy PCE"} {"#name":"keyword" "$":{"id":"kwrd0100"} "$$":[{"#name":"text" "_":"preliminary clinical evaluation PDS"} {"#name":"keyword" "$":{"id":"kwrd0110"} "$$":[{"#name":"text" "_":"pathology discrepancy significance score |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ | |