PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Technology, Radiologic”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 739 records · Page 41Linked to original sources
PubMed2003

What is the effect of reporting all emergency department radiographs?

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of formal radiological reporting of all emergency department (ED) radiographs on clinical practice and patient outcome, and to consider whether a selective reporting policy might prove safe and effective. METHODS: All radiographs taken in a single ED over a six month period were prospectively studied simultaneously in both the emergency and radiology departments to detect cases where a radiograph that was considered normal by ED staff was then reported as abnormal by the reporting radiologist. Whenever such a discrepancy occurred the patient's records were scrutinised to ascertain the source of the discrepancy, with a gold standard interpretation derived from senior clinical review and additional investigations where indicated. The clinical impact of the radiologist's formal report was then assessed. Accuracy of interpretation was considered in relation to the grade of ED staff and the radiographic examination obtained. RESULTS: During the study period, 19468 new patient attendances to the ED generated 11749 radiographic examinations. Discrepancies were detected in 175 patients (1.5% of all radiographic examinations). Of these, 136 (1.2%) were subsequently shown to have been incorrectly interpreted in the ED (ED false negatives), with 40 patients (0.3%) undergoing a change in management as a result. In the remaining 39 the ED interpretation was judged to be correct (radiology false positives), with 16 patients undergoing further investigations or visits to the ED to confirm this. CONCLUSIONS: The formal reporting of ED radiographs by the radiology department detects a number of clinically important abnormalities that have been overlooked. However, this formal reporting also generates a number of incorrect interpretations that may lead to further unnecessary investigations. Some groups of ED radiographs (such as those interpreted by an ED consultant and films of the fingers and toes) may not require formal radiological reporting. The adoption of a selective reporting policy may reduce the reporting workload of the radiology department without compromising patient care.

Consensus↗
PubMed1979

Low-reflectance eyeglass lenses: a viewing aid to radiologists.

Low-reflectance coatings can significantly improve the low contrast resolution (MTF) of eyeglass lenses. The reflectance per surface can be reduced from 4.25% for uncoated lenses to 0.5% for multi-layer coated lenses. The radiologist who wears glasses will note improved viewing comfort with coated lenses and possibly a reduced error rate.

Eyeglasses↗
PubMed1994

Mammography quality assurance from A to Z.

Quality assurance (QA) refers to all planned, systematic activities that instill confidence that quality mammography is being performed. Quality control (QC) refers only to the technical aspects of the examination. Standardized labeling of mammograms and the format for mammographic reports are important parts of a QA program; recommendations for both have been published by the American College of Radiology. Minimum staff for a mammography service consists of a scheduler, technologist(s), medical physicist, and radiologist. The scheduler asks the patient questions to ensure that the appropriate examination is performed, gives the patient instructions, and asks the patient to complete a history questionnaire including a release form to obtain earlier mammograms. One certified, licensed technologist is designated to perform QC, which includes maintaining darkroom, screen, and view box cleanliness; reviewing processor performance, checked with sensitometer, densitometer, and phantom images; repeat analysis; analysis of fixative retained in film, darkroom fog, screen-film contact, and adequacy of compression; and visual inspection of equipment. A certified medical physicist performs equipment acceptance testing and annual QC visits thereafter. The radiologist oversees all aspects of the QA program, including selecting and regularly observing the technologists, selecting and meeting with the physicist, communicating results, ensuring patient follow-up, and assessing patient outcome data. The radiologist is ultimately responsible for image quality and the standard of patient care.

Biopsy↗