Concordance between a neuroradiologist, a consultant radiologist and trained reporting radiographers interpreting MRI head examinations: An empirical study
Journal article
Piper, K., Mitchell, M., Griffin, K., Morgan,T., Roy, A., Thomas, A., Pittock, L., Woznitza, N., Faruqui, R. and Sakel, M. 2020. Concordance between a neuroradiologist, a consultant radiologist and trained reporting radiographers interpreting MRI head examinations: An empirical study. Radiography. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2020.10.016
Authors | Piper, K., Mitchell, M., Griffin, K., Morgan,T., Roy, A., Thomas, A., Pittock, L., Woznitza, N., Faruqui, R. and Sakel, M. |
---|---|
Abstract | Introduction: This study assessed agreement between MRI reporting radiographers and a consultant radiologist compared with an index neuroradiologist when reporting MRI head (brain/internal auditory meati [IAMs]) examinations. The effect on patient management of any discordant reports was also examined. Methods: Two trained MRI reporting radiographers (RRs), a consultant radiologist (CR) and an index neuroradiologist (INR) reported on a random sample of 210 MRI examinations. The radiographers reported during clinical practice and the radiologists in clinical practice conditions. Two independent consultant physicians (neuro-rehabilitation and neuropsychiatry) compared these reports with the index neuroradiologist report for agreement and the clinical importance of discrepant reports. Results: Overall observer agreement between the RRs and CR was comparable in relation to agreement with the INR: RR; 93/210 (44.3%); and the CR; 83/210 (39.4%) for all head MRI examinations (p = 0.32). For brain examinations the difference was similar: RR; 64/180 (35.6%); and CR; 54/190 (30.0%), p = 0.26. Agreement rates for the IAMs examinations were identical, 29/30 (97.7%). For all head MRI examinations (n = 210) there was a very small observed difference of <0.5% in mean agreement between the reporting radiographers and the consultant radiologist (p = 0.92) for examinations where a major disagreement would have been likely to have led to a change in patient management. Conclusion: MRI reporting radiographers reported during clinical practice on MRI head examinations to a level of agreement comparable with a consultant radiologist. Implications for practice: This is an area in which radiographers could provide additional reporting roles to the reporting service to increase capacity. Wider potential benefits include cost-effectiveness and role development/retention of radiographers. |
Keywords | Magnetic resonance imaging ; Head; Brain; Agreement; Radiographers; Radiologists; MRI |
Year | 2020 |
Journal | Radiography |
Publisher | Elsevier |
ISSN | 1078-8174 |
1532-2831 | |
Digital Object Identifier (DOI) | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2020.10.016 |
Official URL | http://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2020.10.016 |
Funder | Canterbury Christ Church University (RKE ERC funded) |
Publication dates | |
Online | 18 Nov 2020 |
Publication process dates | |
Deposited | 18 Nov 2020 |
Accepted | 27 Oct 2020 |
Accepted author manuscript | License File Access Level Open |
Output status | Published |
https://repository.canterbury.ac.uk/item/8wv60/concordance-between-a-neuroradiologist-a-consultant-radiologist-and-trained-reporting-radiographers-interpreting-mri-head-examinations-an-empirical-study
Download files
256
total views167
total downloads0
views this month1
downloads this month