Search

Objective Clinical Imaging contributes to screening, diagnosis, planning and monitoring of treatment and surveillance in cancer care. This literature review summarises evidence about radiographer reporting to help imaging service providers respond to Health Education England's 2017 Cancer Workforce Plan project to expand radiographer reporting in clinical service provision. Key findings Papers published between 1992 and 2018 were reviewed (n = 148). Evidence related to dynamic examinations (fluoroscopy, ultrasound) and mammography was excluded. Content was analysed and summarised using the following headings: clinical scope of practice, responsibilities, training, assessment, impact in practice and barriers to expansion. Radiographer reporting is well established in the United Kingdom. Scope of practice varies individually and geographically. Deployment of appropriately trained reporting radiographers is helping the NHS maintain high quality clinical imaging service provision and deliver a cost-effective increase in diagnostic capacity. Conclusion Working within multiprofessional clinical imaging teams, within a defined scope of practice and with access to medical input when required, reporting radiographers augment capacity in diagnostic pathways and release radiologist time for other complex clinical imaging responsibilities.

To update knowledge on individual radiographer contribution to plain-film reporting workloads; to assess whether there is scope to further increase radiographer reporting capacity within this area.Reporting radiographers were invited to complete an online survey. Invitations were posted to every acute National Health Service trust in the UK whilst snowball sampling was employed via a network of colleagues, ex-colleagues and acquaintances. Information was sought regarding the demographics, geographical location and anatomical and referral scope of practice.A total of 259 responses were received. 15.1% and 7.7% of respondents are qualified to report chest and abdomen radiographs, respectively. The mean time spent reporting per week is 14.5 h (range 1-37.5). 23.6% of radiographers report only referrals from emergency departments whilst 50.6% of radiographers have limitations on their practice.The scope of practice of reporting radiographers has increased since previous studies; however, radiographer reporting of chest and abdomen radiographs has failed to progress in line with demand. There remain opportunities to increase radiographer capacity to assist the management of reporting backlogs.This study is the first to examine demographic factors of reporting radiographers across the UK and is one of the largest in-depth studies of UK reporting radiographers, at individual level, to date.

To assess the accuracy of radiologic interpretation, in the absence of clinical information, in the differentiation of benign and malignant sigmoid strictures at barium enema examination.On two occasions, four independent observers retrospectively assessed examination findings in 78 patients with documented sigmoid strictures (43 benign, 35 malignant). Each stricture was graded by using a five-point scale (definitely malignant to definitely benign).No significant difference existed between the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for the two assessments with any observer. Consensus findings indicated agreement among at least three of the four observers in 68 (87%) and 66 (85%) cases at the first and second assessments, respectively. One benign stricture was called malignant at both assessments. When consensus existed, the positive predictive value for malignant strictures was 96% at both assessments (sensitivity, 63% and 66%). Nine malignant strictures were called benign, three at both assessments. When consensus existed, the positive predictive value for benign strictures was 84% and 88% at the first and second assessments, respectively (sensitivity, 88% and 86%, respectively).The differentiation between a benign and a malignant sigmoid stricture can be made in most cases at barium enema examination. When a stricture appears malignant, the diagnosis is usually correct, but caution is advised when a stricture appears benign.

The College of Radiographers has called for 'Red Dot' schemes to evolve and has recommended the development of radiographer commenting. The implementation of a radiographer comment scheme assumes that radiographers previously participating in 'red dot' schemes have been accurately recognising radiographic abnormalities and are, therefore, able to comment upon, and describe, such radiographic appearances. Research evidence to support such an assumption is sparse. This study compares the ability of radiographers attending a short course on musculoskeletal trauma to 'red dot' and comment on AE radiographic appearances.This study adopted a pre-test, post-test approach. One hundred and twenty one radiographers attending a short course on musculoskeletal trauma (Bradford Red Dot Course) were invited to undertake an assessment of their ability to recognise ('red dot') and describe (comment upon) radiographic abnormalities at the start and end of the short course.One hundred and fifteen radiographers (n=115/121; 95.0%) completed both the pre- and post-training assessments. Post-training mean scores per case improved on average by 9.8% [p=0.012; 95% CI: 2.4, 17.1] for 'red dots' and 12.7% [p=0.007; 95% CI: 3.8, 21.5] for commenting. However, the difference between mean 'red dot' and commenting scores remained similar with mean radiographer comment scores being 13.7% less than mean 'red dot' scores pre-training and 10.8% less post-training.The results of this study indicate that the accuracy of radiographer comments was significantly reduced when compared to the accuracy of 'red dots' for the same radiographic images. The clinical significance of these findings for departments wanting to move from a 'red dot' system to a radiographer commenting scheme is that without appropriate training and audit, the quality of service and assistance to the AE department could be significantly reduced.