A pilot study to assess radiographer preliminary clinical evaluation (PCE) introduced for emergency department adult appendicular X-ray examinations: Comparison of trained and untrained radiographers

INTRODUCTION

Radiographers are transitioning from using "Red Dot" annotations to flag abnormal emergency X-ray images, to providing written preliminary clinical evaluation (PCE) diagnostic comments. This study explored the impact of local training on radiographers' PCE participation and accuracy performance during a trial period.

METHODS

Ten radiographers provided PCE comments for adult appendicular trauma X-ray examinations performed in the Emergency Department of an English public hospital over a 19 week trial period. Five senior radiographers who had received local PCE training and five more recently qualified radiographers, without this local training, participated in the trial. PCE participation rates were recorded and the PCE comments were scored for accuracy compared to the formal radiology report.

RESULTS

There were 796 eligible examinations, of which 528 (66%) had PCE comments. PCE participation was significantly higher (p < 0.001) for the radiographer group who received the training (80%, 253/316) compared to the untrained group (57%, 275/480). Similar levels of PCE accuracy (90% vs. 89%), sensitivity (86% vs. 82%) and specificity (91% vs. 93%) were found for the trained and untrained cohorts respectively, with no statistically significance difference between these scores.

CONCLUSION

Local PCE training was associated with more frequent PCE participation but did not appear to influence PCE accuracy. The accuracy results suggest that radiographers are well equipped to provide PCE comments for adult appendicular X-ray examinations.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Local PCE training is likely to be important for consistent PCE scheme participation. Both experienced and recently qualified radiographers appear well equipped to provide accurate PCE for adult appendicular trauma X-ray examinations.

What information is required in a preliminary clinical evaluation? A service evaluation

INTRODUCTION

The preliminary clinical evaluation (PCE) abnormality flagging system is a progression from the red dot system. The need for a PCE service may be reduced by immediate "hot" reporting services, however, PCE can be valuable in those Trusts that do not have a "hot reporting"service, as well as in the out of hours setting. This study aimed to identify what information clinicians require within the PCE to aid decision making.

METHODS

Emergency Department (ED) clinicians and Radiology reporters were approached to complete a paper survey seeking their preferences on various aspects of the What, Where, How model, regarding their usefulness. Questions were a combination of multiple choice, Likert scale, and free-text.

RESULTS

Thirty participants (20 ED clinicians and 10 Radiology Reporters) provided a 100% response rate. Overall, Where was considered to be most significant (n = 18, 60%), followed by What (n = 11, 37%). Half of participants (n = 15, 50%) considered How to be least significant. ED clinicians found all aspects of the What, Where, How useful, in particular the Where, but to a slightly lesser extent regarding how much displacement was involved. Overall, the information ranked as least useful was how much movement, followed by direction of movement, and type of fracture. The preferred style for a PCE comment is a bullet format.

CONCLUSION

PCE content should accommodate the preferences of ED referrers. Our findings suggest clinicians want information pertaining to what the abnormality is (i.e. the type of injury), where it was (more specific than simply which bone) and if displacement is present.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

These findings add to the current knowledge base and provide support to the local department when implementing the PCE system.

Accuracy of radiographer comment following a two-month experiential and blended learning in appendicular skeleton X-ray interpretation: The Singapore experience

INTRODUCTION

The value of combined blended and experiential learning on radiographer diagnostic comment has not been explored. This study aims to examine the accuracy of image interpretation comment of radiographers who received a period of blended and experiential learning in Radiographer Abnormality Detection Systems (RADS).

METHODS

We evaluated the diagnostic opinions of 13 radiographers who received a blended training and experiential learning (a process of self-learning and reflection) in RADS. Radiographers' opinions on 16,483 images were examined using the final radiologists' report as a reference standard. For each radiographer, we recorded the number of true positive, true negative, false positive and false negative opinions and MedCal® was used to calculate diagnostic performance and error rates. A t-test was used to assess whether the number of images read was associated with performance and whether the radiographers retained performance over time.

RESULTS

Sensitivity ranged from 87.4 (84.0-90.2) to 98.9 (97.5-99.7) with a mean of 94.3 (93.6-94.8). Specificity varied from 96.4 (94.8-97.5) to 99.9 (99.41-100.0) with a mean of 98.2 (97.9-98.4). Diagnostic accuracy ranged from 93.1 (91.5-94.4) to 99.5 (98.9-99.8) with a mean of 96.9 (96.6-97.1). The mean false positive rate was 0.018 (range: 0.010-0.031) with a false negative rate of 0.057 (range: 0.026-0.11). There were no differences in performance between the first and latter nine months of providing opinions and the number of images reviewed was not associated with performance.

CONCLUSION

Radiographers who received blended and experiential learning in RADS provide accurate diagnostic comments on plain emergency appendicular skeleton radiographs.

IMPLICATION FOR PRACTICE

A combined blended and experiential learning can equip radiographers to provide diagnostic opinion on plain appendicular skeleton radiographs.

Accuracy of radiographer preliminary clinical evaluation of skeletal trauma radiographs, in clinical practice at a district general hospital

INTRODUCTION

Error in interpretation of trauma radiographs by referrers is a problem which has detrimental effects on the patient and causes unnecessary repeat attendances. Radiographers can reduce errors by offering their opinion at the time of imaging. The Society and College of Radiographers have a longstanding recommendation that Red Dot (RD) schemes should be replaced by Preliminary Clinical Evaluation (PCE). The purpose of the study was to evaluate radiographer interpretation of skeletal trauma radiographs in clinical practice, determine if there was any difference in ability to interpret appendicular and axial studies, and evaluate appropriateness of PCE implementation.

METHODS

A convenience sample of 23 self-selecting radiographers provided RD and PCE on 762 examinations. Each case was compared against the verified report and assigned a true negative/positive or false negative/positive value. Accuracy, sensitivity and specificity were calculated and performance measures between RD versus PCE, and appendicular versus axial were compared using Two-sample Z-Tests. Error analysis was performed and inter-observer consistency determined.

RESULTS

Overall RD and PCE accuracy, sensitivity and specificity for the study were 90%, 72% and 97% (RD), and 92%, 80% and 97% (PCE) respectively. Significant difference was demonstrated for sensitivity with PCE more sensitive than RD (p-value 0.03) and appendicular more sensitive than axial (RD p-value <0.02, PCE p-value <0.0001). Most errors were false negatives. Inter-observer consistency was evaluated by review of 128 cases and no difference between reviewers was established.

CONCLUSION

Radiographers without specific training were able to provide RD and PCE to a high standard. Radiographers interpreted positive findings more accurately using PCE than RD, and positive findings on appendicular cases were interpreted more accurately than those on axial cases.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This study supports local PCE implementation, contributes to the wider evidence base to justify transition towards PCE and identifies the necessity for local axial image interpretation training.

The impact of intensive training in preliminary image evaluation (PIE) for radiographers in the emergency department of a regional hospital in New Zealand - A pilot study

INTRODUCTION

New Zealand has seen an increase in the X-ray examinations in the emergency departments (ED), and the radiology report is generally unavailable immediately. This requires practitioners managing the patient to take the responsibility of detecting any abnormalities in the images and using such information for the management of the patient. There is, therefore, a need for consideration of the contribution that radiographers could make in the accurate management of the patients in ED in New Zealand. The aim of this study was to assess if an intensive preliminary image evaluation (PIE) training course improved radiographer accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity on extremity X-ray examinations in a regional ED in New Zealand.

METHOD

A pre-post-intervention design was employed for this study. Seven radiographers working at a regional base hospital in New Zealand undertook image evaluation tests to evaluate their ability to detect and describe abnormalities prior to and following a 2-day intensive PIE training course. The training concentrated on acute extremity abnormalities. Tests were then scored to determine sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy.

RESULTS

Following an intensive PIE training course, the post-intervention test mean demonstrated an improved sensitivity by an average of 3.99% (89.01-93.0), specificity improved by an average of 6.13% (79.77-85.90%), and accuracy improved by an average of 3.33% (77.55-80.87%).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that an intensive training course in PIE improved the participants' sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy when evaluating acute extremity X-ray examinations in ED at the study site, however further research is required to see if these results also represent clinical ability.

IMPLICATION FOR PRACTICE

The NZ healthcare system could benefit by the introduction of a radiographers' PIE system. It is therefore recommended that when introducing PIE into an ED in New Zealand, radiographers should undertake additional training to improve image evaluation sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy prior to participation.

The efficacy of preliminary clinical evaluation for emergency department chest radiographs with trauma presentations in pre- and post-training situations

INTRODUCTION

The chest X-ray (CXR) is the most frequently performed radiographic examination. This study evaluates radiographers' ability to localise traumatic CXR pathology and provide a preliminary clinical evaluation (PCE) for these cases.

METHODS

This observer study was performed in a district general hospital in the United Kingdom (UK). A 58-case image bank was used with 20 positive cases. Participants were awarded a maximum of three points, based on abnormality recognition and descriptive accuracy. Localisation data were recorded with ROCView. Training was delivered via short online recorded tutorials covering an introduction of a systematic search strategy for CXR, how to recognise the common abnormalities covered in the tests, how to structure a PCE and multiple practice cases to review at participants' own pace. Pre- and post-training data was recorded.

RESULTS

Nine participants completed the study. Overall, pooled sensitivity remained consistent (78.9%-78.8%) following training, specificity and accuracy showed improvement of 79.0%-89.9% and 78.9%-86.0% respectively. An increase in the number of correct localisations and PCE scores were also evident. Participants performed better at correctly identifying a pneumothorax compared to skeletal abnormalities.

CONCLUSION

Improvements in performance were evident for most participants' abnormality localisations and PCE scores, following the training intervention. The study highlighted areas of CXR PCE that may require further training, such as detecting superimposed or subtle abnormalities.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This study provides additional support for the development of PCE systems in additional areas of imaging practice.

Radiographer abnormality flagging systems in the UK - A preliminary updated assessment of practice

INTRODUCTION

Radiographer abnormality flagging systems have been in use in the UK for over 30 years, with the guidance of the Society and College of Radiographers indicated that the preliminary clinical evaluation (PCE), or comment, be the preferred system of choice. This study aimed to provide an updated assessment of current practice based upon a previous 2008 study.

METHODS

A cross-sectional online survey was disseminated via Twitter and aimed at departmental and reporting leads. It requested information on the types of flagging and reporting systems operated, scope of the systems employed, required education of participants, and the role of audit.

RESULTS

Responses were received from 31 Trusts within the UK. Red dot systems were employed in 90% (n = 28) of sites, with 26% (n = 8) undertaking PCE. Skeletal radiographs were most commonly reviewed (90%; n = 28) followed by chest (58%; n = 18) and abdomen (32%; n = 10). Only 13% (n = 4) sites indicated if the image was normal but 71% (n = 22) allowed the radiographer to indicate if they were unsure. There was marked variation in the educational requirements and use of audit.

CONCLUSION

Compared to 2008 there appears to be quite minimal change in practices in the UK. There does appear to be some increase in the use of flagging systems generally and a higher proportion of PCE systems in comparison to red dot but the use of education and audit does not necessarily show much development in the past 15 years.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Significant conclusions cannot be drawn due to limited sample size, however, it may support further study and consideration in relation to implementation and potentially standardisation of abnormality detection systems may be justified.

Preliminary clinical evaluation: Where are we? An international scoping review

BACKGROUND

The College of Radiographers' vision was that diagnostic radiographers in the UK would be writing preliminary clinical evaluations (PCE) on images. Their 2013 policy supporting the use of PCE has not been updated in a decade and it might be suggested PCE practices in the UK have not really moved on, though elsewhere it appears to have gained traction. The aim of this scoping review was to establish the current global status of the use of PCE.

METHOD

The Arksey and O'Malley scoping review framework and PRISMA-ScR guidelines were used to develop a protocol to identify studies between January 2013 to January 2024 using six databases. Collated literature was analysed using content analysis to identify themes.

RESULTS

52 relevant studies were identified for inclusion. Studies focused predominantly on evaluating accuracy, education, perceptions, and new initiatives. Themes identified a developing role in the use of PCE internationally, perhaps more than in the UK, and in a range of modalities and clinical settings though projectional radiography remains the mainstay. Barriers and drivers to the use of PCE were identified in addition to some quality mechanisms used to support PCE implementation, though impact of implementation was not well explored.

CONCLUSION

Considering PCE has been an aspiration for more than a decade, it remains relatively infrequently researched. There is growing scope internationally, particularly in Australia, yet there is no real evaluation of the impact and role that PCE may have.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Until further research into the potential impact of PCE and barriers to its implementation, it is likely practices may not evolve with the risk AI technologies may supersede necessity for the practice.

Preliminary clinical evaluation (PCE): A transnational scoping review of current radiography practice

INTRODUCTION

Image interpretation by radiographers has gained widespread recognition; however, current evidence provides very limited knowledge of the state and scope of practice transnationally. This study therefore sought to explore the current state and scope of preliminary clinical evaluation (PCE) practice to further understand international best practices in terms of policy, training and education, and practice competence of radiographers when carrying out PCE.

METHOD

A comprehensive literature search was completed via federated electronic databases (EBSCOhost and Web of Science) and professional radiography platforms for journal articles and policy or practice guidance documents, respectively. Data were charted from eligible studies following screening of articles in accordance with the predefined eligibility criteria. Themes were generated using inductive narrative analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-one peer reviewed articles and 5 radiography practice policy documents were identified. Over 60% of the included studies were carried out in the United Kingdom and Australia with about 60% focused on projectional radiography of the appendicular and axial skeletons. Three main themes were developed and included: scope of PCE practice and implementation; PCE proficiency indicators; factors influencing PCE participation and performance.

CONCLUSION

Gaps exist around defined scope of practice, standardisation, commenting format and compliance with policy. There is very limited evidence around PCE practice in cross-sectional imaging, thus, it is difficult to ascertain the current state and scope of practice internationally. There is a need for countries to develop standard commenting frameworks as well as enforcement of compliance. Additionally, more research is required to ascertain the competence and benefits of PCE practice within cross sectional imaging.