Concordance between a neuroradiologist, a consultant radiologist and trained reporting radiographers interpreting MRI head examinations: An empirical study

MRI reporting radiographers - Has there been a progression or regression in numbers and scope of practice?

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to determine whether there had been a progression or regression in the numbers and scope of practice of reporting radiographers in Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) in the United Kingdom (UK), using data from a previous study conducted by the author in 2019/20 as a comparison.

METHODS

Data was gathered via a survey sent to multiple users and groups of MRI Radiographers in the UK. The survey consisted of a questionnaire, using both numerical and free text answers to enable the responders to elaborate on their scope of practice whilst also allowing numerical data to be easily analysed. The responses were analysed for patterns and comparison was made with the data from the previous survey. The questionnaire was based on three main themes of those in training, those trained and those in practice.

RESULTS

A total of 62 sites had radiographers in training (n =24) or trained (n = 125) in MRI reporting compared to 46 sites in the previous survey. The majority of responders were from England (n = 56/62) with only a few sites in Scotland (n = 4) and Wales (n = 2). There were 24 radiographers in training, a reduction compared to the previous survey and an increase in the number of radiographers trained (n = 80 to n = 125) and in practice (n = 57 to n = 84). Scope of practice had also increased with the addition of MRCPs, orbits and pituitary.

CONCLUSION

This survey provides evidence that the number and scope of practice of MRI reporting radiographers within the UK has progressed when compared to a previous survey from 2019/20. The numbers however are still low and there remain significant geographical variations. The continued predominance of single handed practice is a concern and the reasons behind this and the slow expansion of skill mix reporting in this modality needs further investigation.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This study provides evidence of the number and scope of practice of the radiographer reporting of MRI examinations in the UK. It also demonstrates that there has been an increase in scope and number of radiographers reporting MRI scans, this will provide evidence and proof of concept for departments looking to initiate or increase this practice.

Reporting radiographers in Europe survey: An overview of the role within the European Federation of Radiographer Society (EFRS) member countries

INTRODUCTION

Reporting radiographers undertake an important role in healthcare and for the radiographer profession in general. First introduced in the United Kingdom, reporting radiographers are now practicing in several other European countries. Our objective was to investigate the workforce of reporting radiographers across the European Federation of Radiographer Societies (EFRS) community.

METHOD AND MATERIAL

A voluntary anonymous 34 item electronic survey was distributed online using social media accounts such as Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn covering a wide range of topics relating to professional role, advanced practice, education, and seniority. The questionnaire was distributed during a 12-week period in 2022.

RESULT

A total of 345 individual responses were received from 15 countries with majorities of respondent from United Kingdom (n = 245, 71%) and Denmark (n = 66, 19%). Mean age was 41.9 (S.D 9.8), similar for females, 42.5 (S.D 9.0) and men 40.9 years (S.D 9.7). Most reporting radiographers worked in public hospitals (90%). The vast majority of the respondents (n = 270, n = 94%) authored and signed their own clinical reports while a minority (n = 18, 6%) stated that their reports were checked by radiologists.

CONCLUSION

The survey highlights the scope of practice of reporting radiographers working in Europe. Reporting is becoming a career path for an increasing number of radiographers across Europe and there is assess to academic education and clinical support.

IMPLICATION FOR PRACTICE

Reporting radiographers fulfil an important role within the current demands of healthcare. This demand is likely to increase in the future, and therefore it is vital that there is some form of standardisation in the level of education that this group of healthcare professionals receive.

Concordance between a gastrointestinal consultant radiologist, a consultant radiologist and qualified reporting radiographers interpreting abdominal radiographs

INTRODUCTION

Radiographers can accurately report musculoskeletal and chest radiographs, but there is paucity of research comparing the performance of reporting radiographers (RRs) with consultant radiologists when interpreting and reporting abdominal radiographs. This study assessed interobserver agreement in the clinical setting between reporting radiographers and a consultant radiologist compared to an expert gastrointestinal radiologist in a District General Hospital. Major discordant reports affecting patient management were also examined.

METHODS

126 abdominal radiographs reported by 3 RRs in clinical practice were randomly selected and reported by a consultant radiologist and index gastrointestinal radiologist. The reports of the RRs and consultant radiologist were compared against the reports made by the index radiologist for agreement by a colorectal consultant surgeon. All 126 reports were scored as being in either complete agreement, minor disagreement or major disagreement which would have resulted in a change to patient management.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in overall agreement between the consultant radiologist (CR) and RRs when compared to the index radiologist (CR: n = 90/126, 71.4% and RRs: n = 94/126, 74.6%. p = 0.57). Major disagreements were found, but there was no significant difference between both groups (CR: n = 23/126, 18.3% and RRs: n = 17/126, 13.5%. p = 0.30).

CONCLUSION

RRs can report abdominal radiographs to a comparable level of agreement as a consultant radiologist in the clinical setting. There was no significant difference in reports deemed to affect patient management.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This study addresses the gap in assessing the performance of RRs reporting abdominal radiographs. This small scale study indicates that radiographers could provide additional support in the reporting of abdominal radiographs. This would help to reduce radiologist workload and enhance the role of the reporting radiographer.

CLASSIFICATION

Agreement between reporting radiographers and radiologists interpreting and reporting abdominal radiographs.

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.