scholarly journals Digital radiography reject analysis of examinations with multiple rejects: an Australian emergency imaging department clinical audit

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brittany Stephenson‐Smith ◽  
Michael J Neep ◽  
Pamela Rowntree
Keyword(s):  
Digital Radiography ◽  
Clinical Audit ◽  
Imaging Department ◽  
Emergency Imaging ◽  
Reject Analysis

scholarly journals [P104] Digital radiography reject analysis in Dutch hospitals

2018 ◽  
Vol 52 ◽  
pp. 130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harmen Bijwaard ◽  
Ischa Waard – Schalkx ◽  
Sandra Noij
Keyword(s):  
Digital Radiography ◽  
Reject Analysis

scholarly journals Reject analysis in digital radiography: A local study on radiographers and students’ attitude in Iran

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sajjad Rastegar ◽  
Jalal Beigi ◽  
Ehsan Saeidi ◽  
Ali Dezhkam ◽  
Tofigh Mobaderi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Digital Radiography ◽  
Local Study ◽  
Reject Analysis

scholarly journals Digital Radiography Reject Analysis: Data Collection Methodology, Results, and Recommendations from an In-depth Investigation at Two Hospitals

2008 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
David H. Foos ◽  
W. James Sehnert ◽  
Bruce Reiner ◽  
Eliot L. Siegel ◽  
Arthur Segal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Digital Radiography ◽  
Analysis Data ◽  
Reject Analysis

scholarly journals Image rejects in general direct digital radiography

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (10) ◽  
pp. 205846011560433 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bjørn Hofmann ◽  
Tine Blomberg Rosanowsky ◽  
Camilla Jensen ◽  
Kenneth Hong Ching Wah
Keyword(s):  
Image Quality ◽  
Digital Radiography ◽  
Management Training ◽  
Digital Systems ◽  
Imaging Systems ◽  
Radiology Department ◽  
Positioning Errors ◽  
Deletion Rate ◽  
Reject Analysis

Background The number of rejected images is an indicator of image quality and unnecessary imaging at a radiology department. Image reject analysis was frequent in the film era, but comparably few and small studies have been published after converting to digital radiography. One reason may be a belief that rejects have been eliminated with digitalization. Purpose To measure the extension of deleted images in direct digital radiography (DR), in order to assess the rates of rejects and unnecessary imaging and to analyze reasons for deletions, in order to improve the radiological services. Material and Methods All exposed images at two direct digital laboratories at a hospital in Norway were reviewed in January 2014. Type of examination, number of exposed images, and number of deleted images were registered. Each deleted image was analyzed separately and the reason for deleting the image was recorded. Results Out of 5417 exposed images, 596 were deleted, giving a deletion rate of 11%. A total of 51.3% were deleted due to positioning errors and 31.0% due to error in centering. The examinations with the highest percentage of deleted images were the knee, hip, and ankle, 20.6%, 18.5%, and 13.8% respectively. Conclusion The reject rate is at least as high as the deletion rate and is comparable with previous film-based imaging systems. The reasons for rejection are quite different in digital systems. This falsifies the hypothesis that digitalization would eliminates rejects. A deleted image does not contribute to diagnostics, and therefore is an unnecessary image. Hence, the high rates of deleted images have implications for management, training, education, as well as for quality.

Reject analysis in direct digital radiography

2012 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 174-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eivind Richter Andersen ◽  
Jannike Jorde ◽  
Nadia Taoussi ◽  
Sadia Halima Yaqoob ◽  
Bente Konst ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Digital Radiography ◽  
Reject Analysis

scholarly journals A clinical audit of anatomical side marker use in a paediatric medical imaging department

2016 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
pp. 148-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Barry ◽  
Saravana Kumar ◽  
Rebecca Linke ◽  
Emma Dawes
Keyword(s):  
Medical Imaging ◽  
Clinical Audit ◽  
Imaging Department

scholarly journals A clinical audit of anatomical side marker use in a pediatric medical imaging department: A quantitative and qualitative investigation

PLoS ONE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (11) ◽  
pp. e0242594
Author(s):  
Lilian Chung ◽  
Saravana Kumar ◽  
Joanne Oldfield ◽  
Maureen Phillips ◽  
Megan Stratfold
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Medical Imaging ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Clinical Audit ◽  
Diagnostic Feature ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Quantitative And Qualitative Research ◽  
Imaging Department ◽  
Practice Standards ◽  
Stage 1

Background The presence of a radiopaque or digital anatomical side marker (ASM) is an important diagnostic feature on radiographs and should be a routine feature on every radiographic image. Despite its importance, research has indicated numerous instances where ASMs were absent which have the potential to lead to adverse events. To date, few studies have systematically examined the use of ASMs in clinical practice and explored medical imaging professionals’ perspectives on ASM use. This research aimed to address this knowledge gap. Methods This investigation was conducted in two stages. Stage 1 involved a retrospective clinical audit of 421 randomly selected radiographs within 12-months at a pediatric medical imaging department. The data were analyzed for overall presence and type of marker use. Stage 2 comprised of semi-structured interviews with 11 radiographers to garner their perspectives on ASM use, and barriers and enablers to their use in clinical practice. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematically analyzed. Results The overall presence of ASMs (radiopaque and digital) was observed on 99 per cent of radiographs. There was a noticeable shift towards the use of digital (78.8 per cent) compared to radiopaque ASMs (20.2 per cent), highlighting the growing trend towards using ASM in post-processing. A handful of images (N = 4) did not include any ASMs. Semi-structured interviews revealed multifaceted barriers (time, infection precautions, and patient factors) and few enablers (professionalism, legal requirement) for ASM use. Conclusion This investigation, informed by quantitative and qualitative research paradigms, has shed new light on an important area of radiography practice. While missing ASMs were a small feature, there continue to remain opportunities where best practice standards can be improved. The increasing use of digital ASMs potentially highlights a shift in clinical practice standards.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document