{"title":"Accuracy of appendicular radiographic image interpretation by radiographers and junior doctors in Ghana: Can this be improved by training?","authors":"B.B. Ofori-Manteaw , E. Dzidzornu","doi":"10.1016/j.radi.2019.04.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Access to image interpretation in Ghana remains a challenge with the limited number of radiologists. Radiographers with the right skills and knowledge in image interpretation could help address this challenge. The aims of the study were to determine and compare the ability (accuracy, sensitivity and specificity) of radiographers and junior doctors in interpreting appendicular trauma radiographs both before and after training.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>An action research study involving a pre and post training test was carried out to determine the level of accuracy, sensitivity and specificity in abnormality detection by radiographers after undergoing training when compared to junior doctors. Eight radiographers and twelve junior doctors were invited to interpret an image bank of 30 skeletal radiographs, both before and upon completion of an educational program. The participants’ tests were scored against a reference standard provided by an experienced radiologist. Pre and post-test analysis were carried out for comparison.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Post training mean accuracy (radiographers 83.3% vs 68.8%, p = 0.017; doctors 81.9% vs 71.6%, p = 0.003), sensitivity (radiographers 83.3% vs 69.2%, p = 0.042; doctors 77.2% vs 67.8% p = 0.025) and specificity (radiographers 83.3% vs 68.3%, p = 0.011; doctors 86.7% vs 75.6% p = 0.005) of both groups significantly improved. No significant differences were recorded between the radiographers and doctors after the training event.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The study revealed that, with a well-structured training program, radiographers and junior doctors could improve on their accuracies in radiographic abnormality detection and commenting on trauma radiographs.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47416,"journal":{"name":"Radiography","volume":"25 3","pages":"Pages 255-259"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.radi.2019.04.003","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiography","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1078817418302025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Abstract
Introduction
Access to image interpretation in Ghana remains a challenge with the limited number of radiologists. Radiographers with the right skills and knowledge in image interpretation could help address this challenge. The aims of the study were to determine and compare the ability (accuracy, sensitivity and specificity) of radiographers and junior doctors in interpreting appendicular trauma radiographs both before and after training.
Methods
An action research study involving a pre and post training test was carried out to determine the level of accuracy, sensitivity and specificity in abnormality detection by radiographers after undergoing training when compared to junior doctors. Eight radiographers and twelve junior doctors were invited to interpret an image bank of 30 skeletal radiographs, both before and upon completion of an educational program. The participants’ tests were scored against a reference standard provided by an experienced radiologist. Pre and post-test analysis were carried out for comparison.
Results
Post training mean accuracy (radiographers 83.3% vs 68.8%, p = 0.017; doctors 81.9% vs 71.6%, p = 0.003), sensitivity (radiographers 83.3% vs 69.2%, p = 0.042; doctors 77.2% vs 67.8% p = 0.025) and specificity (radiographers 83.3% vs 68.3%, p = 0.011; doctors 86.7% vs 75.6% p = 0.005) of both groups significantly improved. No significant differences were recorded between the radiographers and doctors after the training event.
Conclusion
The study revealed that, with a well-structured training program, radiographers and junior doctors could improve on their accuracies in radiographic abnormality detection and commenting on trauma radiographs.
在加纳,由于放射科医生数量有限,获得图像解释仍然是一个挑战。具有正确图像解释技能和知识的放射技师可以帮助解决这一挑战。本研究的目的是确定和比较放射技师和初级医生在培训前后解释阑尾创伤x线片的能力(准确性、敏感性和特异性)。方法通过培训前和培训后测试,比较培训后放射技师与初级医师在异常检测方面的准确性、敏感性和特异性。8名放射技师和12名初级医生被邀请在完成教育计划之前和之后解释30张骨骼x光片的图像库。参与者的测试是根据经验丰富的放射科医生提供的参考标准进行评分的。对试验前后进行分析比较。结果岗位培训平均准确率(放射科技师83.3% vs 68.8%, p = 0.017;医生81.9%对71.6%,p = 0.003),敏感性(放射技师83.3%对69.2%,p = 0.042;医生77.2% vs 67.8% p = 0.025)和特异性(放射技师83.3% vs 68.3%, p = 0.011;医生86.7% vs 75.6% (p = 0.005),两组均有显著改善。在培训活动后,放射技师与医生之间并无显著差异。结论通过合理的培训,放射科医师和初级医师在创伤x线片异常检测和评价方面的准确性得到了提高。
RadiographyRADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
34.60%
发文量
169
审稿时长
63 days
期刊介绍:
Radiography is an International, English language, peer-reviewed journal of diagnostic imaging and radiation therapy. Radiography is the official professional journal of the College of Radiographers and is published quarterly. Radiography aims to publish the highest quality material, both clinical and scientific, on all aspects of diagnostic imaging and radiation therapy and oncology.