Wessex regional radiology audit: Barium enema in colo-rectal carcinoma

Thomas, RE; Fairhurst, Joanna; Frost, Robert A.

doi:10.1016/s0009-9260(05)83297-0

Cited by 35 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Four of the 21 errors in the present study were attributed to perceptive errors (missing filling defects in pools of barium; tumour surface interface missed; tumour missed through overlying loops; soft‐tissue mass effect missed; tumour ulceration missed; and tumour among diverticular disease) 3–8 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 65%

“…The main reasons for technical errors were poor preparation in acute cases and overlapping loops. Reasons for technical error include: too much barium, too much faeces, not enough films, poor quality films, poor distension, barium too dense, and caecum not reached 3–8 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The failure to identify a colorectal cancer at barium enema is a medical error. As reported in the literature the majority of errors are perceptive, with the remainder being technical or a combination of technical and perceptive error 3–8 . Perception errors on barium enema cannot be divorced from the technique of examination in that improved technique may lead to improved perception 3–8 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Why barium enemas fail to identify colorectal cancers

McDonald

Lyall

Israel

et al. 2001

ANZ Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 65%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Why barium enemas fail to identify colorectal cancers

McDonald

Lyall

Israel

et al. 2001

ANZ Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Error rates in radiological interpretation have been subject to continual scrutiny over the past 6 years 4–6 . The focus of these studies has been the detection of errors in interpretation of individual films, primarily because of their impact on patient outcome.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The reproducibility of assessing radiological reporting: studies from the development of the General Medical Council’s Performance Procedures

Jolly¹,

Ayers²,

Macdonald³

et al. 2001

Med Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To investigate the reproducibility of peer ratings of consultant radiologists’ reports, as part of the new General Medical Council (GMC) Performance Procedures. Design An evaluation protocol was piloted, used in a blocked, balanced, randomized generalizability analysis with three blocks of three judges (raters), each rating 30 reports from 10 radiologists, and re‐rated to estimate intrarater reliability with conventional statistics (kappa). Setting Rating was performed at the Royal College of Radiologists. Volunteers were sampled from 23 departments of radiology in university teaching and district general hospitals. Participants A nationally drawn non‐random sample of 30 consultant radiologists contributing a total of 900 reports. Three trained and six non‐trained judges were used in the rating analysis. Results A protocol was generated that was usable by judges. Generalizable results would be obtained with not less than three judges all rating the same 60 reports from a radiologist. Conclusions Any assessment of performance of technical abilities in this field will need to use multiple assessors, basing judgements on an adequate sample of reports.

show abstract

“…A recent meta-analysis37 also showed CT colonography has better sensitivity and specificity for polyps (>5 mm diameter) than barium enema (optical colonoscopy as reference standard). Colorectal cancer detection rates of 85% have remained static in the UK for 15 years38 39 but new data from Special Interest Group in Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (SIGGAR) 1 have shown CT colonography detects significantly more cancers than barium enema (Halligan S, BSGAR Annual Meeting Bristol, 2010)…”

Section: Is There Still a Role For Barium Enema?mentioning

confidence: 99%

CT colonography: what the gastroenterologist needs to know

Wylie

Burling

2011

Frontline Gastroenterol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

REVIEWCT colonography has evolved rapidly over recent years into the best radiological method for investigating colonic neoplasia. Technological advances enable very fast CT scans (patients hold breath for less than 10 s per scan) with improved spatial resolution and lower radiation dose. User friendly reading software, incorporating computer aided diagnosis, enables radiologists to accurately review data in multiple anatomical planes, utilising both two-dimensional and 'endoluminal' three-dimensional displays. However, as demand for colonic investigation increases (particularly in an older, more frail population), alongside socio-political drives to reduce waiting times, the quality of interaction between endoscopy and radiology becomes of paramount importance. There are pros and cons for both CT colonography and endoscopy and their relative benefits can be fully exploited by closely aligned gastroenterology and radiology teams, potentially improving diagnostic efficiency and patient experience. This review will update gastroenterologists on current CT colonography techniques and will emphasise the need for strong partnership between endoscopy and radiology colon imaging services.

show abstract

Wessex regional radiology audit: Barium enema in colo-rectal carcinoma

Cited by 35 publications

References 9 publications

Why barium enemas fail to identify colorectal cancers

Why barium enemas fail to identify colorectal cancers

The reproducibility of assessing radiological reporting: studies from the development of the General Medical Council’s Performance Procedures

CT colonography: what the gastroenterologist needs to know

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About