A Two-year Reject/retake Profile Analysis in Pediatric Radiology

Wk, Chu; Ferguson, Sherise D.; Wunder, B; Smith, Rene; Jj, Vanhoutte

doi:10.1097/00004032-198201000-00005

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this study the average number of radiographs used per examination was 1.60. This value is lower than most of the published values, which range from 2.4 to 4.0 radiographs per examination [24,25] and higher than the value obtained (1.5 radiographs per examination) by Al-Malki et al [3]. The number of radiographs used per examination in the Imam Khomeini hospital is relatively higher than the other two hospitals.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 56%

Patient dose from radiographic rejects/repeats in radiology centers of Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Iran

Jabbari¹,

Zeinali²,

Rahmatnezhad³

2012

Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Medical diagnostic X-rays are the largest manmade source of ionizing radiation received by the members of the general public. The aim of this study was to evaluate the radiographic reject/repeat rate and also to determine dose to the patients from radiographic rejects/repeats in radiology centers of Urmia University of Medical Sciences. During a 4 month period the most frequently examinations were chosen in three radiology centers. A form was designed as a reject/repeat analysis form for radiographers to complete each time a film was rejected by radiologists or repeated. The collected data were compiled at the end of each week and entered into a computer for analysis at the end of study. The results of this study showed that highest and lowest repetition rates were for pelvis, 14.01% and upper limb, 4.17%, respectively. The main reasons of repetition of radiographs were due to exposure (54%) and positioning (18%) errors. The average repeat rate in all three hospitals was 7.20%. It was found that human error has important role to repetition of radiographs. It is demonstrated that those patients having repeated radiographs received an average of 3.23 Gy·cm<sup>2</sup>. Based on the findings of this study it must be remembered that the highest repetition rate was for pelvis. Considering the radiosensitive organs related to pelvis especially in pediatric patients some special considerations must be applied for pelvis examinations

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 56%

Patient dose from radiographic rejects/repeats in radiology centers of Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Iran

Jabbari¹,

Zeinali²,

Rahmatnezhad³

2012

Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…6 This system is often complicated by the timeconsuming task of determining reasons for rejection "after the fact" and determining the total number of films consumed. 7 During early clinical experience with digital radiography (DR), it was proposed that this new technology might eliminate rejected images and render any RAP obsolete. 8 However, imaging departments quickly realized that this was not the case 9 and that a RAP was still a vital part of a QA program.…”

Section: Rejected Image Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Ongoing quality control in digital radiography: Report of AAPM Imaging Physics Committee Task Group 151

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quality control (QC) in medical imaging is an ongoing process and not just a series of infrequent evaluations of medical imaging equipment. The QC process involves designing and implementing a QC program, collecting and analyzing data, investigating results that are outside the acceptance levels for the QC program, and taking corrective action to bring these results back to an acceptable level. The QC process involves key personnel in the imaging department, including the radiologist, radiologic technologist, and the qualified medical physicist (QMP). The QMP performs detailed equipment evaluations and helps with oversight of the QC program, the radiologic technologist is responsible for the day-to-day operation of the QC program. The continued need for ongoing QC in digital radiography has been highlighted in the scientific literature. The charge of this task group was to recommend consistency tests designed to be performed by a medical physicist or a radiologic technologist under the direction of a medical physicist to identify problems with an imaging system that need further evaluation by a medical physicist, including a fault tree to define actions that need to be taken when certain fault conditions are identified. The focus of this final report is the ongoing QC process, including rejected image analysis, exposure analysis, and artifact identification. These QC tasks are vital for the optimal operation of a department performing digital radiography.

show abstract

“…These are referred to as rejected films. A reject image is described as an image that does not add diagnostic information to clinical questions because of poor image quality, and thus, the image has to be retaken ( 1 – 3 ). Whenever a film is rejected, the radiograph must be repeated.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis and Economic Implication of X-Ray Film Reject in Diagnostic Radiology Department of Jimma University Specialized Hospital, Southwest Ethiopia

Zewdu¹,

Kadir²,

Berhane³

2017

Ethiop J Health Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPatients usually undergo repeated X-ray examinations after their initial X-ray radiographs are rejected due to poor image quality. This subjects the patients to excess radiation exposure and extra cost.It is therefore investigating the magnitude and causes of reject is mandatory. This study aimed to assess the reject rate of X-ray films and its economic implication in order to obtain information for further recommendations on image quality, cost and radiation exposure.MethodA cross-sectional study approaches was employed. Reject rate was measured for two x-rays in the department across all plain x-ray films examinations using a structured format on which relevant data for reject were recorded by investigators. The results were then collected and entered into a database for analysis.ResultReject rate and cause of reject were measured across all plane x-ray examinations for the hospital. From a total of 6563 exposed films, 16.85% were rejected. This leads to economic waste of 24,721.99 ETB, or 17.8% of a total cost in 4month period and increase in radiation dose to both patients and staff.ConclusionThe findings from this study show that both the overall reject rate and individual reject rate were higher than the accepted range which could be due to machine fault, operator's technical limitations, or absence of quality control program in the department. We recommend that regular quality assurance and quality control procedure which are well documented should be established in the department.

show abstract

A Two-year Reject/retake Profile Analysis in Pediatric Radiology

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

Patient dose from radiographic rejects/repeats in radiology centers of Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Iran

Patient dose from radiographic rejects/repeats in radiology centers of Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Iran

Ongoing quality control in digital radiography: Report of AAPM Imaging Physics Committee Task Group 151

Analysis and Economic Implication of X-Ray Film Reject in Diagnostic Radiology Department of Jimma University Specialized Hospital, Southwest Ethiopia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About