A survey of the radiation safety practices of veterinary practitioners during portable equine radiography in Ireland.

Veterinary practitioners and other personnel involved in the examination are exposed to ionizing radiation while performing portable radiographs on horses. An online survey was distributed to all Veterinary Council of Ireland-registered practices where the self-reported practice profile is at least 20% equine work. The survey contained questions relating to radiation safety training, protocols, personal dosimetry and lead protection usage, repeat exposures, sedation, and personnel roles during the examination. The aim of the survey was to document the current radiation safety practices of equine veterinary practitioners during portable radiography. The results showed that although adherence to guidance set out by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is reasonably good, compliance rates can be improved. Personal dosemeter usage and repeat rate reduction could particularly benefit from further improvement. This is of the utmost importance in ensuring that occupational radiation exposure to veterinary practitioners is kept to an absolute minimum during their daily practice.

Understanding reasons for image rejection by radiologists and radiographers.

INTRODUCTION: A core element of a radiographer's role is the decision on whether a radiograph is sufficient for diagnosis, or a repeat examination is needed. Studies illustrate the disagreement on the diagnostic value of radiographs between radiographers and radiologists, which may influence repeat examinations. This study investigates if parameters contributing to image quality are possible determinants to explain the difference between professions. METHODS: A total of 74 radiographers and radiologists from three different countries assessed three data sets (chest PA, hip HBL, c-spine lateral), each containing 25 radiographs. All observers scored image quality in terms of anatomical visualisation, positioning, collimation, detector exposure and judged the diagnostic value using the ACR RadLex classification. All assessments were performed on a clinically relevant display. Visual grading characteristics were used to compare image quality evaluations between groups. RESULTS: Radiographers scored the visualisation of anatomical structures lower than radiologists though the difference was not statistically significant. A difference in classification using the RadLex categories - with radiographers rejecting more radiographs - was demonstrated. Only the subjective evaluation of the detector exposure correlated statistically with RadLex ratings. There was no difference between radiographers and radiologists when reviewing patient positioning and collimation. CONCLUSION: Radiographers and radiologists agree on the visualisation of anatomical structures, but radiographers are more critical towards the diagnostic value. Within the criteria studied, the evaluation of anatomical structures does not explain the difference. Radiographs have a higher change of being rejected if the observer (subjectively) assessed the detector exposure as inappropriate. This correlation is stronger for radiographers.

Agreement Between International Radiologists on the Appropriateness and Urgency in Lumbar Spine MRI Referrals.

Purpose: To determine how radiologists across health-care jurisdictions internationally assess the appropriateness and urgency levels of lumbar spine Magnetic Resonance Imaging MRI referrals. Patients and Methods: Clinical information was extracted from 203 lumbar spine MRI referrals. Texts were divided into 10 datasets and embedded into a software to facilitate the classification process. Participant radiologists were recruited at the Image Perception Lab, at the Radiological Society of North America Congress, 2019 and through the institution radiology network. Radiologists were asked if they use referral guidelines in their practices. Radiologists assigned appropriateness and urgency levels based on the referral text. Appropriateness level descriptors were: indicated, indicated but needs more information or not indicated. Urgency levels were categorized: urgent, semi-urgent, or not urgent. All cases containing neurological symptoms with/without red flags were extracted and exact agreement between radiologists' responses on the indication status was calculated. Results: Seventy radiologists from 25 countries participated; 42% of participants indicated non-use of referral guidelines. Poor-moderate radiology agreements were recorded for appropriateness and referral urgency level decisions. 79.6% of responses indicated that cases containing neurological symptoms with/without red flags were indicated for scanning. Conclusion: Despite referral guidelines promotion, nearly half of participants stated non-usage. Subsequently, a varied agreement levels were found in assigning the appropriateness of the referrals. Appropriateness of referrals with neurological symptoms (with/without red flags) recorded good agreement.

The Development of Expertise in Radiology: In Chest Radiograph Interpretation, "Expert" Search Pattern May Predate "Expert" Levels of Diagnostic Accuracy for Pneumothorax Identification.

Purpose To investigate the development of chest radiograph interpretation skill through medical training by measuring both diagnostic accuracy and eye movements during visual search. Materials and Methods An institutional exemption from full ethical review was granted for the study. Five consultant radiologists were deemed the reference expert group, and four radiology registrars, five senior house officers (SHOs), and six interns formed four clinician groups. Participants were shown 30 chest radiographs, 14 of which had a pneumothorax, and were asked to give their level of confidence as to whether a pneumothorax was present. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was carried out on diagnostic decisions. Eye movements were recorded with a Tobii TX300 (Tobii Technology, Stockholm, Sweden) eye tracker. Four eye-tracking metrics were analyzed. Variables were compared to identify any differences between groups. All data were compared by using the Friedman nonparametric method. Results The average area under the ROC curve for the groups increased with experience (0.947 for consultants, 0.792 for registrars, 0.693 for SHOs, and 0.659 for interns; P = .009). A significant difference in diagnostic accuracy was found between consultants and registrars (P = .046). All four eye-tracking metrics decreased with experience, and there were significant differences between registrars and SHOs. Total reading time decreased with experience; it was significantly lower for registrars compared with SHOs (P = .046) and for SHOs compared with interns (P = .025). Conclusion Chest radiograph interpretation skill increased with experience, both in terms of diagnostic accuracy and visual search. The observed level of experience at which there was a significant difference was higher for diagnostic accuracy than for eye-tracking metrics. (©) RSNA, 2016 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

AN INVESTIGATION INTO CT RADIATION DOSE VARIATIONS FOR HEAD EXAMINATIONS ON MATCHED EQUIPMENT.

This study investigated radiation dose and image quality differences for computed tomography (CT) head examinations across centres with matched CT equipment. Radiation dose records and imaging protocols currently employed across three European university teaching hospitals were collated, compared and coded as Centres A, B and C from specification matched CT equipment models. Patient scans (n = 40) obtained from Centres A and C were evaluated for image quality, based on the visualisation of Commission of European Community (CEC) image quality criteria using visual grading characteristic (VGC) analysis, where American Board of Radiology examiners (n = 11) stated their confidence in identifying anatomical criteria. Mean doses in terms of CT dose index (CTDIvol-mGy) and dose length product (DLP-mGy cm) were as follows: Centre A-33.12 mGy and 461.45 mGy cm; Centre B -101 mGy (base)/32 mGy (cerebrum) and 762 mGy cm and Centre C-71.98 mGy and 1047.26 mGy cm, showing a significant difference (p ≤ 0.05) in DLP across centres. VGC analysis indicated better visualisation of CEC criteria on Centre C images (VGCAUC 0.225). All three imaging protocols are routinely used clinically, and image quality is acceptable in each centre. Clinical centres with identical model CT scanners have variously customised their protocols achieving a range of dose savings and still resulting in clinically acceptable image quality.

Decision Making and Variation in Radiation Exposure Factor Selection by Radiologic Technologists.

The goal of radiographic imaging is to produce a diagnostically useful image while minimizing patient radiation dose. This study aimed to review variations in exposure factor selection by radiologic technologists for virtual patients with varying body mass index characteristics. Eleven technologists were asked to assign exposure parameters (kVp, mAs, source-to-image receptor distance, and grid use) to 10 computer-generated patient images for each of four radiographic examinations (anteroposterior [AP] shoulder; AP lumbar spine; lateral lumbar spine; AP portable chest). The virtual patients represented five body mass index categories-underweight, healthy weight, overweight, obese, and superobese. As participants assigned exposures, their visual patterns were recorded by a Tobii TX300 eye-tracker. Significant (P < .05) correlation was found between radiographer age/experience and assignment of mAs for AP shoulder and lumbar examinations. Greater age/experience correlated with higher mAs for the AP shoulder examination, but with lower values for lumbar examinations. Strong correlations also existed between times to first fixations on relevant anatomic areas, and kVp/mAs values existed for the AP portable chest examination. Exposure selection differences related to age/experience highlight inconsistencies in the practice of exposure parameter setting. The reason for these inconsistencies requires further investigation, and how to address deficiencies in practice requires consideration to optimize safe patient care. Because of the small sample size used, further research into the relationship between visual factors and individual examinations is suggested, after the findings regarding the AP portable chest examination.

Is the iPad suitable for image display at American Board of Radiology examinations?

OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to determine the acceptability of the iPad 3 as a display option for American Board of Radiology (ABR) examinations. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A set of 20 cases for each of nine specialties examined by the ABR was prepared. Each comprised between one and seven images and case information and had been used in previous ABR Initial Certification examinations. Examining radiologists (n = 119) at the ABR oral Initial Certification examinations reviewed sets from one or more specialties on both a 2 MP LED monitor and on the iPad 3 and rated the visibility of the salient image features for each case. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was performed to compare ratings. In addition, a thematic analysis of participants' opinions was undertaken. RESULTS: When all specialties were pooled, the iPad 3 ratings were significantly higher than the monitor ratings (p = 0.0217). The breast, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, and nuclear medicine specialties also returned significantly higher ratings for the visibility of relevant image features for the iPad 3. Monitor ratings were significantly higher for the vascular and interventional specialty, although no images were rated unacceptably poor on the iPad in this specialty. CONCLUSION: The relevant image features were rated more visible on the iPad 3 than on the monitors overall. The iPad 3 was well accepted by a large majority of examiners and can be considered adequate for image display for examination in most or all specialties.

Liver displacement during ventilation in Thiel embalmed human cadavers - a possible model for research and training in minimally invasive therapies.

Respiration-related movement of organs is a complication in a range of diagnostic and interventional procedures. The development and validation of techniques to compensate for such movement requires appropriate models. Human cadavers embalmed with the Thiel method remain flexible and could provide a suitable model. In this study liver displacement during ventilation was assessed in eight Thiel embalmed cadavers, all of which showed thoracic and abdominal motion. Four cadavers displayed realistic lung behaviour, one showed some signs of pneumothorax after prolonged ventilation, one had limited filling of the lungs, and two displayed significant leakage of air into the thorax. A coronal slice containing the largest section through the liver was imaged with a real-time Fast Gradient Echo (FGR) MRI sequence: Craniocaudal displacement of the liver was then determined from a time-series of slices. The maximum liver displacement observed in the cadavers ranged from 7 to 35 mm. The ventilation applied was comparable to tidal breathing at rest and the results found for liver displacement are similar to values in the literature for respiratory motion of the liver under similar conditions. This indicates that Thiel embalmed cadavers have potential as a model for research and training in minimally invasive procedures.

Diagnostic efficacy of handheld devices for emergency radiologic consultation.

OBJECTIVE: Orthopedic injury and intracranial hemorrhage are commonly encountered in emergency radiology, and accurate and timely diagnosis is important. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the diagnostic accuracy of handheld computing devices is comparable to that of monitors that might be used in emergency teleconsultation. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Two handheld devices, a Dell Axim personal digital assistant (PDA) and an Apple iPod Touch device, were studied. The diagnostic efficacy of each device was tested against that of secondary-class monitors (primary class being clinical workstation display) for each of two image types-posteroanterior wrist radiographs and slices from CT of the brain-yielding four separate observer performance studies. Participants read a bank of 30 wrist or brain images searching for a specific abnormality (distal radial fracture, fresh intracranial bleed) and rated their confidence in their decisions. A total of 168 readings by examining radiologists of the American Board of Radiology were gathered, and the results were subjected to receiver operating characteristics analysis. RESULTS: In the PDA brain CT study, the scores of PDA readings were significantly higher than those of monitor readings for all observers (p < or = 0.01) and for radiologists who were not neuroradiology specialists (p < or = 0.05). No statistically significant differences between handheld device and monitor findings were found for the PDA wrist images or in the iPod Touch device studies, although some comparisons approached significance. CONCLUSION: Handheld devices show promise in the field of emergency teleconsultation for detection of basic orthopedic injuries and intracranial hemorrhage. Further investigation is warranted.

The impact of acoustic noise found within clinical departments on radiology performance.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: In recent years, there has been increasing interest in the impact of environmental factors such as ambient light on radiologist performance. One commonly encountered distractor found within all clinical departments that has received little or no attention is acoustic noise. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present work records the level of noises encountered within environments where radiologic images are viewed and establishes the impact of a clinically relevant level of noise on the ability of radiologists to perform a typical diagnostic task. Noise levels were recorded 10 times within each of 14 environments, 11 of which were locations where radiologic images are judged. Thirty chest images were then presented to 26 senior radiologists, who were asked to detect up to three nodular lesions within 30 posteroanterior chest x-ray images in the absence and presence of noise at an amplitude demonstrated in the clinical environment. Jackknife free-response receiver-operating characteristic analyses was performed on the free-response data. RESULTS: The results demonstrated that noise amplitudes rarely exceeded that encountered with normal conversation with the maximum mean value for an image-viewing environment being 56.1 dB. This level of noise had no impact on the ability of radiologists to identify chest lesions with figure of merits of 0.68, 0.69, and 0.68 with noise and 0.65, 0.68, and 0.67 without noise for chest radiologists, nonchest radiologists, and all radiologists, respectively. Equally, no differences were seen for false-positive and false-negative scores or on the time required to judge the images. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that noise at levels encountered within areas where radiologic images are viewed is not a major distractor within the reporting environment, but the need for further work has been identified.

Optimization of region of interest luminances may enhance radiologists' light adaptation.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Radiologic image details are best discriminated at luminance levels to which the eye is adapted. Recommendations that ambient light conditions are matched to overall monitor luminance to encourage appropriate adaptation are based on an assumption that clinically significant regions within the image match average monitor luminance. The current work examines this assumption. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three image types were considered: posteroanterior (PA) chest; PA wrist; and computed tomography (CT) head. Luminance at clinically significant regions was measured at hilar region and peripheral lung (chest), distal radius (wrist), and supraventricular white matter (head). Average monitor luminances were calculated from measurements at 16 regions of the display face plate. Three ambient light levels-30, 100 and 400 lux-were employed. Thirty samples of each image type were used. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were noted between average monitor luminances and clinically important regions of interest of up to a factor of 3.8, 2, and 6.3 for chest, wrist, and CT head images respectively (P < .0001). Values for the hilum of the chest and distal radius were higher than average monitor levels, whereas the reverse was observed for the peripheral lung and CT brain. Increasing ambient light had no impact on results. CONCLUSIONS: Clinically important radiologic information for common radiologic examinations is not being presented to observers in a way that facilitates optimized adaptation. This may have a significant impact on the ability of the observer to identify details with low contrast discriminability. The importance of image-processing algorithms focussing on clinically significant abnormalities rather than anatomic regions is highlighted.