The Role of the Supertechnologist

Friedenberg, Richard M.

doi:10.1148/radiology.215.3.r00jn49630

Cited by 21 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such discrepancies may have serious clinical implications given that these reports, unlike those of radiology trainees and emergency doctors, are not subsequently checked by a neuroradiologist. Finally, despite the recent interest in cranial CT reporting by neuroradiographers [3], few studies have assessed report discrepancy rates in this group: 1 study assessed 2 radiographers' reports for paediatric head CT and found the accuracy in detecting significant abnormalities to be between 49% and 75% [14]; the only other study has assessed a single radiographer and shown a report sensitivity of 85.4%, which compared favourably with the sensitivity for senior trainees: 87.5% [15]. All these studies have recruited only small numbers of candidates: the maximum number of participants in previous studies assessing head CT reporting has been 18 [8].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…A specific example of reporting by non-radiologists is for out-of-hours cranial CT, the demand for which is increasing: in some centres requests for these are vetted by neuroradiographers (neurotechnologists) and provisionally reported by clinicians who are not radiologists [3,4]. A few studies have addressed the head CT misreporting rates of radiology trainees (residents or specialist registrars) and emergency doctors but these have recruited only small numbers of candidates and no study has accurately assessed the ability of neuroradiographers to report head CTs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparing the accuracy of initial head CT reporting by radiologists, radiology trainees, neuroradiographers and emergency doctors

Gallagher¹,

Tay²,

Vowler³

et al. 2011

BJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Demand for out-of-hours cranial CT imaging is increasing and some departments have considered addressing this shortfall by allowing non-radiologists to provisionally report imaging studies. The aim of this work was to assess whether it is appropriate for non-radiologists to report head CTs by comparing the misreporting rates of those who regularly report head CTs with two groups of non-radiologists who do not usually report them: neuroradiographers and emergency doctors. Methods: 62 candidates were asked to report 30 head CTs, two-thirds of which were abnormal, and the results were compared by non-parametric statistical analysis. Results: There was no evidence of a difference in the score between neuroradiographers, neuroradiologists and general consultant radiologists. Neuroradiographers scored significantly higher than senior radiology trainees, and the emergency doctors scored least well. Conclusion:The results of this preliminary study show that appropriately trained neuroradiographers are competent at reporting the range of abnormalities assessed with this test and that their misreporting rates are similar to those who already independently report these studies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing the accuracy of initial head CT reporting by radiologists, radiology trainees, neuroradiographers and emergency doctors

Gallagher¹,

Tay²,

Vowler³

et al. 2011

BJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It might be difficult for the technologists to differentiate small solid nodules from normal structures, such as the pulmonary vessels, because the attenuation and the shape of small solid nodules on CT images are almost the same as the attenuation and the shape of adjacent pulmonary vessels. Skill mix, which is thought to be a concept originating from England [19], is one of the keywords in screening mammographies; several investigators have reported the useful contribution of radiologic technologists in prereading and double reading of mammograms [3]. One study evaluated the effects of review of mammograms by radiological technologists in a population-based breast cancer screening programme; a substantial number of cancers were detected as a result of the technologists' review [4].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of sensitivity of lung nodule detection between radiologists and technologists on low-dose CT lung cancer screening images

Kakinuma¹,

Ashizawa²,

Kobayashi³

et al. 2012

BJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The objective of this study was to compare the sensitivity of detection of lung nodules on low-dose screening CT images between radiologists and technologists. Methods: 11 radiologists and 10 technologists read the low-dose screening CT images of 78 subjects. On images with a slice thickness of 5 mm, there were 60 lung nodules that were $5 mm in diameter: 26 nodules with pure ground-glass opacity (GGO), 7 nodules with mixed ground-glass opacity (GGO with a solid component) and 27 solid nodules. On images with a slice thickness of 2 mm, 69 lung nodules were $5 mm in diameter: 35 pure GGOs, 7 mixed GGOs and 27 solid nodules. The 21 observers read screening CT images of 5-mm slice thickness at first; then, 6 months later, they read screening CT images of 2-mm slice thickness from the 78 subjects. Results: The differences in the mean sensitivities of detection of the pure GGOs, mixed GGOs and solid nodules between radiologists and technologists were not statistically significant, except for the case of solid nodules; the p-values of the differences for pure GGOs, mixed GGOs and solid nodules on the CT images with 5-mm slice thickness were 0.095, 0.461 and 0.005, respectively, and the corresponding pvalues on CT images of 2-mm slice thickness were 0.971, 0.722 and 0.0037, respectively. Conclusion: Well-trained technologists may contribute to the detection of pure and mixed GGOs $5 mm in diameter on low-dose screening CT images.

show abstract

“…The objectives were to experience the work of radiologists for the educational value, and to explore the possibility of technicians taking part in CT image interpretation procedures. The idea of establishing a "super technologists" system in which a trained screener conducts the first interpretation of CT images has been put forward 16 . The students had no experience of CT image interpretation, although they had seen CT images with findings in clinical classes.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methods of evaluating the effectiveness of double-checking in interpreting mass screening images

Matsumoto¹,

Furukawa²,

Machida

et al. 2004

SPIE Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we present two methods of evaluating the effectiveness of double check (by two radiologists or by a CAD system and a radiologist): One method uses ROC analysis and the other uses the phi correlation coefficient (φ). We used the first method to evaluate the effectiveness of two radiologists conducting double check through discussion (i.e. the radiologists confer; conference system). We used the second method to evaluate the effectiveness of double check in which Reader 2 makes a final assessment by referring to the assessment of Reader 1 (reference system). It is suggested that double check conducted by two radiologists through discussion may not be so effective; however, double check in which Reader 2 makes a final assessment by referring to the assessment of Reader 1 may be very effective. In addition, we discuss problems that may occur in relation to Reader 2 deciding whether to adopt the assessment of Reader 1, and practical models of double check by a CAD system and a radiologist. Continued research is necessary to establish a double check system that improves diagnostic accuracy in practical situations, i.e. it is unknown if assessments are correct.

show abstract

The Role of the Supertechnologist

Cited by 21 publications

References 14 publications

Comparing the accuracy of initial head CT reporting by radiologists, radiology trainees, neuroradiographers and emergency doctors

Comparing the accuracy of initial head CT reporting by radiologists, radiology trainees, neuroradiographers and emergency doctors

Comparison of sensitivity of lung nodule detection between radiologists and technologists on low-dose CT lung cancer screening images

Methods of evaluating the effectiveness of double-checking in interpreting mass screening images

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About