Real-time x-ray abnormality alerts for emergency departments using a radiographer comment model - a multisite pilot study

INTRODUCTION

The timely communication of clinically significant image appearances to Emergency Department (ED) referrers is necessary for optimum patient care. Australian reliance on verbal communication only is time-limited, open to misinterpretation and lacks transparency. A combined radiographer alert and comment model was designed to reliably communicate image abnormalities to ED referrers in real-time.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary steering group designed the model for all ED general imaging. Protocols were developed to document radiographer comments (critical, urgent and clinically significant) in patients' medical records. Critical findings were communicated directly to ED. Five NSW hospitals varying in size, complexity and population demographics piloted the model between three to twelve months during 2021-2022. Site auditors compared comments with the radiology report and designated each as True Positive (TP), False Positive (FP), indeterminate and clinically significant. Indeterminate cases were analysed by an external radiologist. Inter-observer consensus was obtained for all classifications via two independent auditors. The Positive Predictive Value (PPV), or precision of the comment, was calculated for each site.

RESULTS

Radiographers (n = 69) provided comments for 1102 cases. The pooled average PPV for TP was 0.96; (0.947-0.971; 95% CI). The weighted mean error (FP comments) was 3.9%; (2.9% - 5.3%.; 95% CI).

CONCLUSION

The Radiographer Comment model provided consistent levels of commenting precision and reproducibility across a range of sites with a pooled average PPV (0.96). The False Positive rate or weighted mean error (FP) of 3.9% (2.9% - 5.3%.; 95% CI) was low.

IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE PRACTICE

A strategic, interprofessional approach in the implementation of an image alert combined with a Radiographer Comment can be adapted across a variety of hospital settings for ED and other departments.

Accuracy of radiographer comment following a two-month experiential and blended learning in appendicular skeleton X-ray interpretation: The Singapore experience

INTRODUCTION

The value of combined blended and experiential learning on radiographer diagnostic comment has not been explored. This study aims to examine the accuracy of image interpretation comment of radiographers who received a period of blended and experiential learning in Radiographer Abnormality Detection Systems (RADS).

METHODS

We evaluated the diagnostic opinions of 13 radiographers who received a blended training and experiential learning (a process of self-learning and reflection) in RADS. Radiographers' opinions on 16,483 images were examined using the final radiologists' report as a reference standard. For each radiographer, we recorded the number of true positive, true negative, false positive and false negative opinions and MedCal® was used to calculate diagnostic performance and error rates. A t-test was used to assess whether the number of images read was associated with performance and whether the radiographers retained performance over time.

RESULTS

Sensitivity ranged from 87.4 (84.0-90.2) to 98.9 (97.5-99.7) with a mean of 94.3 (93.6-94.8). Specificity varied from 96.4 (94.8-97.5) to 99.9 (99.41-100.0) with a mean of 98.2 (97.9-98.4). Diagnostic accuracy ranged from 93.1 (91.5-94.4) to 99.5 (98.9-99.8) with a mean of 96.9 (96.6-97.1). The mean false positive rate was 0.018 (range: 0.010-0.031) with a false negative rate of 0.057 (range: 0.026-0.11). There were no differences in performance between the first and latter nine months of providing opinions and the number of images reviewed was not associated with performance.

CONCLUSION

Radiographers who received blended and experiential learning in RADS provide accurate diagnostic comments on plain emergency appendicular skeleton radiographs.

IMPLICATION FOR PRACTICE

A combined blended and experiential learning can equip radiographers to provide diagnostic opinion on plain appendicular skeleton radiographs.