Reject analysis in digital radiography: A local study on radiographers and students' attitude in Iran

Assessment of image rejection in digital radiography

X-ray imaging uses ionizing radiation to generate diagnostic images. However, unnecessary radiation exposure can pose potential risks, including an increased risk of malignancy. One factor contributing to unnecessary radiation exposure is the rejection and retaking of X-ray images, which can lead to higher patient and occupational radiation doses. This study aimed to assess digital radiography rejection rates, causes of recurrence, and the most commonly repeated types of examinations. A cross-sectional online-based survey was conducted in 2022, involving 62 randomly selected radiographers in the UAE. The survey was distributed to radiographers through the head of radiology departments in various hospitals. Hospitals agreed to participate in the survey without disclosing their name. The data collected was analyzed using Excel. The study showed that 71% of radiographers working in the UAE hold a bachelor's degree. The examinations most frequently repeated were related to anatomical areas, with the spine accounting for 37.7% and facial bone for 19.7% of cases. The factors influencing repetition were primarily related to positioning (48.4%) and artifacts (21%), with the motion being the main cause of artifacts, including voluntary and involuntary movements. This study concluded that the most prevalent cause of repeating and retaking images is positioning, followed by artifacts. Furthermore, night shifts and workload impact radiographer performance, increasing the likelihood of picture retakes. The average number of rejects and repeated images has been reduced as new generations and modern equipment have been introduced, which also helped decrease the numbers.

Digital radiography reject analysis of examinations with multiple rejects: an Australian emergency imaging department clinical audit

INTRODUCTION

The largest source of manmade ionising radiation exposure to the public stems from diagnostic medical imaging examinations. Reject analysis, a form of quality assurance, was introduced to minimise repeat exposures. The purpose of this study was to analyse projection-specific reject rates and radiographic examinations with multiple rejects.

METHODS

A retrospective audit of rejected radiographs was undertaken in a busy Australian metropolitan emergency digital X-ray room from March to June 2018. The data were collected by reject analysis software embedded within the X-ray unit. Reject rates, and reasons for rejection for each X-ray projection were analysed.

RESULTS

Data from 11, 596 images showed overall reject rate was 10.3% and the overall multiple reject rate was 1.3%. The projections with both a high number and high percentage of rejects were antero-posterior (AP) chest (175, 18.1%), AP pelvis (78, 22.5%), horizontal beam hip (61, 33.5%) and horizontal beam knee (116, 30.5%). The projections with both a high frequency and multiple reject rate were horizontal beam knee (32, 8.4%) and horizontal beam hip (17, 9.3%). The top reasons for multiple rejects were positioning (67.1%) and anatomy cut-off (8.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study demonstrated that projection-specific reject and multiple reject analysis in digital radiography is necessary in identifying areas for quality improvement which will reduce radiation exposure to patients. Projections that were frequently repeated in this study were horizontal beam knee and horizontal beam hip. Future research could involve re-auditing the department following the implementation of improvement strategies to reduce unnecessary radiation exposure.