Open AccessRadiographer Reporting: Discussion and Australian workplace trial
Author(s) -
Cook Aiden P.,
Oliver Tanya,
Ramsay Lester
Publication year - 2004
Publication title -
radiographer
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.484
H-Index - 18
eISSN - 2051-3909
pISSN - 0033-8273
DOI - 10.1002/j.2051-3909.2004.tb00002.x
Subject(s) - gold standard (test) , radiography , medicine , medical physics , metropolitan area , diagnostic accuracy , family medicine , radiology , medical education , pathology
ABSTRACT This paper reports an investigation into the accuracy and effectiveness of two (2) senior Australian radiographers in the reporting of appendicular musculo‐skeletal radiographs in the adult trauma situation. and discusses the international debate on radiographer role extension into plain film reporting. The study of 540 patients referred to a large metropolitan emergency imaging department demonstrated high rates of diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity = 98.00% specificity = 99.11%) in the assessment of appendicular musculo‐skeletal radiographs. 294 out of 300 positive examinations were identified correctly (FPR=0.88%) as were 225 out of 227 negative or normal examinations (FNR=2.00%). A discussion on relevant statistical measures and their definitions is outlined. In the study radiologist reports are used as the comparative gold standard. The findings demonstrate an ability of clinically experienced radiographers to accurately and effectively provide diagnostic opinions on musculoskeletal radiographs. A formalised approach to radiographer reporting can be justified and a formal program to train appropriately experienced radiographers is recommended.