General Practitioner satisfaction with a radiographer-led general radiography reporting service at a district general hospital in the UK

Assessing the barriers and enablers to the implementation of the diagnostic radiographer musculoskeletal X-ray reporting service within the NHS in England: a systematic literature review

INTRODUCTION

The United Kingdom (UK) government's healthcare policy in the early 1990s paved the way adoption of the skills mix development and implementation of diagnostic radiographers' X-ray reporting service. Current clinical practice within the public UK healthcare system reflects the same pressures of increased demand in patient imaging and limited capacity of the reporting workforce (radiographers and radiologists) as in the 1990s. This study aimed to identify, define and assess the longitudinal macro, meso, and micro barriers and enablers to the implementation of the diagnostic radiographer musculoskeletal X-ray reporting service in the National Healthcare System (NHS) in England.

METHODS

Multiple independent databases were searched, including PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE; Embase; CINAHL, and Google Scholar, as well as journal databases (Scopus, Wiley), healthcare databases (NHS Evidence Database; Cochrane Library) and grey literature databases (OpenGrey, GreyNet International, and the British Library EthOS depository) and recorded in a PRISMA flow chart. A combination of keywords, Boolean logic, truncation, parentheses and wildcards with inclusion/exclusion criteria and a time frame of 1995-2022 was applied. The literature was assessed against Joanna Briggs Institute's critical appraisal checklists. With meta-aggregation to synthesize each paper, and coded using NVivo, with context grouped into macro, meso, and micro-level sources and categorised into subgroups of enablers and barriers.

RESULTS

The wide and diverse range of data (n = 241 papers) identified barriers and enablers of implementation, which were categorised into measures of macro, meso, and micro levels, and thematic categories of context, culture, environment, and leadership.

CONCLUSION

The literature since 1995 has reframed the debates on implementation of the radiographer reporting role and has been instrumental in shaping clinical practice. There has been clear influence upon both meso (professional body) and macro-level (governmental/health service) policies and guidance, that have shaped change at micro-level NHS Trust organisations. There is evidence of a shift in culturally intrenched legacy perspectives within and between different meso-level professional bodies around skills mix acceptance and role boundaries. This has helped shape capacity building of the reporting workforce. All of which have contributed to conceptual understandings of the skills mix workforce within modern radiology services.

Checklists for interpreting chest radiographs: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

What is known about checklists for interpreting chest radiographs? The question will guide the development of the inclusion criteria for the scoping review. Breaking down the scoping review question will allow the evaluation of inclusion and exclusion criteria for the protocol. The eligibility of the proposed research question will be assessed using the Population or Participants, Concept and Context (PCC) framework.

BACKGROUND

X-ray reporting can be standardised using checklists. Checklists may reduce the time needed to produce a comprehensive X-ray report and improve the quality and consistency of detecting abnormalities on chest radiographs. This scoping review aims to map the available literature on what is known about checklists for interpreting chest radiographs.

METHODS

We will follow the methodological framework for scoping reviews originally described by Arksey and O'Malley. The scoping review will include articles that describe checklists for reducing diagnostic errors, checklists for analysing chest radiographs, checklists for identifying abnormalities on chest radiographs and checklists for reporting chest radiographs in all settings. Search terms are chest radiographs, checklists, and chest X-rays. We will search for peer-reviewed articles and grey literature including dissertations and theses. We will search online databases including Ovid Medline and Ebscohost, to identify articles published in English from 1994 to 2022. The searched articles will undergo two levels of screening, first the title and abstract screening, then a full-text screening by two reviewers. Data from the selected articles will be extracted, using a tested extraction form and charted using the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines.

RESULTS

The results will be collated, summarised and discussed including any limitations of the included articles. The articles will be summarised in a table, as well as narratively. The distribution of studies will be summarised quantitatively and the numerical analysis will provide an overview and identify knowledge gaps. Content analysis will map different checklists available for chest interpretation.

DISCUSSION

The results of the scoping review will be used to develop a checklist that will be used by medical doctors in collaboration with radiographers working in settings where there are no radiologists on-site, for interpreting chest radiographs.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

Scoping review protocol registered with Open Science Framework on 27 July 2022. Registration https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/JS5PQ.

Learning from patient experiences of projection imaging through the use of online feedback platforms

INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND

Projection radiography remains a well-used diagnostic tool in healthcare, and its use is continually increasing. The volume of feedback collected from patients has grown exponentially but is rarely analysed within the service to meaningfully underpin change. Professions such as nursing currently make use of patient feedback during training yet there is comparatively little use in diagnostic radiography. Research exists into the use of social media during radiotherapy treatment, highlighting how it could be embraced in future research. However, there remains a sparsity of publications discussing the experiences of patients with projection radiography despite its prominence within diagnostic imaging. Online platforms for feedback are available to most industries and readily embraced and used. They are also becoming increasingly available to healthcare providers. This study aimed to assess and analyse the patient experience of projection radiography using the stories of patients via an online platform.

METHODOLOGY

Recognising that humans do not experience healthcare in a binary way, the authors selected a narrative method as the most appropriate qualitative methodology to analyse and understand 181 patient stories relating to projection radiography from the Care Opinion UK website. Each story was read three times to establish codes and themes and to ensure author familiarity with the patient's words & descriptions. This resulted in 30 empirical codes with the most frequently used being split into three major themes for discussion RESULTS & CONCLUSION: The three major themes considered the radiography experience, the encounter with professionals and service provision. Online sources of feedback provide valuable data for health researchers and provide access to insights which might otherwise go unconsidered. Patients instinctively perceive radiological examinations to result in delays to their care and report surprise when discovering examinations are delivered swiftly, though it remains that innovations such as radiographer-led discharge could be better utilised to enhance the patient experience. In addition, it is evident that administrative functions in diagnostic radiology departments are considered poor and from the descriptions given in the study by patients, the administrative side of the service does not meet their needs. Patient stories demonstrate that radiography is not perceived as vital to patient care and is frequently devalued through the notion that health professions are limited to medical doctor and nurse. The work of radiographers is not valueless to the patient evidenced by their desire to thank staff for their work, but its value is poorly understood and could be further enhanced by embracing online feedback as part of continuing professional and service development.

Difficulties associated with access to training and clinical support for Reporting Radiographers - A narrative evidence synthesis

OBJECTIVES

This narrative synthesis of evidence identifies and explores issues that impact upon the expansion or effectiveness of Reporting Radiographers working in all diagnostic modalities within the United Kingdom (UK). The publication focuses on accessibility to training for prospective Reporting Radiographers as well as clinical support within and beyond training.

KEY FINDINGS

Fifteen studies informed the themes of this article, they were published between 2014 and 2021. Reporting Radiographers often found it difficult find support during training and once qualified, this was usually due to the availability and workload of supervising staff. Although resistance and obstruction were experienced by many. Concerns relating to pay, promotion and interest were expressed by some respondents whilst access to courses and finance were highlighted as areas of variance across the UK.

CONCLUSION

Inadequate support of Reporting Radiographers is impairing expansion of the specialism, whilst impacting capability and morale. This increases risk of patient harm, delays to care and inefficiency, it also threatens the sustainability of services. Negative interactions between Reporting Radiographers and Radiologists or managers is disappointing considering development of the specialism; evidence of Reporting Radiographer effectiveness and current collaboration between Royal College of Radiologists and Society of Radiographers. Issues raised in relation to pay/promotion and litigation could be clarified with ease, this should be considered when guidance is updated. Access to finance and courses is a major barrier in some regions of the UK. Scope exists for further exploration of training. England has used grants to facilitate uptake, these may prove to be an important tool in other countries.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Drivers to increase recruitment should be implemented alongside measures to facilitate accessibility to training and improvements to support infrastructure.

Radiograph report style preferences of referrers at a district general hospital in the West Midlands, England, UK

INTRODUCTION

Many articles and guidelines have been published proposing suggestions for the optimal radiology report style; it is likely that different referrers will prefer different styles owing to a number of clinical variables. The aim of this study is to assess the x-ray report style preferences of referrers at a district general hospital.

METHOD

This electronic survey study used convenience sampling. An email invitation was sent to all referrers who had requested imaging examinations in the six months prior to the study start date. Participants were asked their opinions on the inclusion of recommendations and advice and to indicate their preferences of mock reports with combinations of the following; short/long, in-depth/brief and paragraph/bullet points. Manual analysis was undertaken in Excel.

RESULTS

There were 114 participants from the identified population of 356, giving a response rate of 32%. Nearly all participants find the inclusion of recommendations and advice to be useful (n = 109, 96%). Seventy-nine participants (69.3%) request skeletal x-ray examinations, and 100 (87.7%) request chest x-ray examinations. More than half of skeletal referrers (n = 42, 53.2%) and the majority of chest referrers (n = 45, 45%) prefer reports with short sentences, brief, bullet point format.

CONCLUSION

The most preferred report style for skeletal and chest x-ray reports is short sentences, brief with bullet-point format. These findings add to the current knowledge base and provide different report style options. Tailoring report styles could optimise service users' experience depending on clinical variables and might improve reporting workflow.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Potential differences in style preferences may exist between community and hospital referrers. Consequently, focussed research regarding the report style preferences of GPs is recommended as an area for further research.