Radiographic image interpretation by Australian radiographers: a systematic review
Abstract Introduction Radiographer image evaluation methods such as the preliminary image evaluation (PIE), a formal comment describing radiographers’ findings in radiological images, are embedded in the contemporary radiographer role within Australia. However, perceptions surrounding both the capac...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2019-12-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.356 |
| _version_ | 1817983924764147712 |
|---|---|
| author | Andrew Murphy Ernest Ekpo Thomas Steffens Michael J. Neep |
| author_facet | Andrew Murphy Ernest Ekpo Thomas Steffens Michael J. Neep |
| author_sort | Andrew Murphy |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Introduction Radiographer image evaluation methods such as the preliminary image evaluation (PIE), a formal comment describing radiographers’ findings in radiological images, are embedded in the contemporary radiographer role within Australia. However, perceptions surrounding both the capacity for Australian radiographers to adopt PIE and the barriers to its implementation are highly variable and seldom evidence‐based. This paper systematically reviews the literature to examine radiographic image interpretation by Australian radiographers and the barriers to implementation. Methods The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses were used to systematically review articles via Scopus, Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, ScienceDirect and Informit. Articles were deemed eligible for inclusion if they were English language, peer‐reviewed and explored radiographic image interpretation by radiographers in the context of the Australian healthcare system. Letters to the editor, opinion pieces, reviews and reports were excluded. Results A total of 926 studies were screened for relevance, 19 articles met the inclusion criteria. The 19 articles consisted of 11 cohort studies, seven cross‐sectional surveys and one randomised control trial. Studies exploring radiographers’ image interpretation performance utilised a variety of methodological designs with accuracy, sensitivity and specificity values ranging from 57 to 98%, 45 to 98% and 68 to 98%, respectively. Primary barriers to radiographic image evaluation by radiographers included lack of accessible educational resources and support from both radiologists and radiographers. Conclusion Australian radiographers can undertake PIE; however, educational and clinical support barriers limit implementation. Access to targeted education and a clear definition of radiographers’ image evaluation role may drive a wider acceptance of radiographer image evaluation in Australia. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-13T23:39:13Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-ae4fcf76b9c04673840c56cdd4f99d71 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2051-3895 2051-3909 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-13T23:39:13Z |
| publishDate | 2019-12-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences |
| spelling | doaj.art-ae4fcf76b9c04673840c56cdd4f99d712022-12-22T02:24:36ZengWileyJournal of Medical Radiation Sciences2051-38952051-39092019-12-0166426928310.1002/jmrs.356Radiographic image interpretation by Australian radiographers: a systematic reviewAndrew Murphy0Ernest Ekpo1Thomas Steffens2Michael J. Neep3Department of Medical Imaging St Paul's Hospital Vancouver BC CanadaFaculty of Health Sciences Discipline of Medical Imaging Science The University of Sydney Lidcombe NSW AustraliaDepartment of Medical Imaging Princess Alexandra Hospital Brisbane Qld AustraliaDepartment of Medical Imaging Logan Hospital Meadowbrook Qld AustraliaAbstract Introduction Radiographer image evaluation methods such as the preliminary image evaluation (PIE), a formal comment describing radiographers’ findings in radiological images, are embedded in the contemporary radiographer role within Australia. However, perceptions surrounding both the capacity for Australian radiographers to adopt PIE and the barriers to its implementation are highly variable and seldom evidence‐based. This paper systematically reviews the literature to examine radiographic image interpretation by Australian radiographers and the barriers to implementation. Methods The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses were used to systematically review articles via Scopus, Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, ScienceDirect and Informit. Articles were deemed eligible for inclusion if they were English language, peer‐reviewed and explored radiographic image interpretation by radiographers in the context of the Australian healthcare system. Letters to the editor, opinion pieces, reviews and reports were excluded. Results A total of 926 studies were screened for relevance, 19 articles met the inclusion criteria. The 19 articles consisted of 11 cohort studies, seven cross‐sectional surveys and one randomised control trial. Studies exploring radiographers’ image interpretation performance utilised a variety of methodological designs with accuracy, sensitivity and specificity values ranging from 57 to 98%, 45 to 98% and 68 to 98%, respectively. Primary barriers to radiographic image evaluation by radiographers included lack of accessible educational resources and support from both radiologists and radiographers. Conclusion Australian radiographers can undertake PIE; however, educational and clinical support barriers limit implementation. Access to targeted education and a clear definition of radiographers’ image evaluation role may drive a wider acceptance of radiographer image evaluation in Australia.https://doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.356General radiographyimage interpretationradiographer commentingradiographysystematic review |
| spellingShingle | Andrew Murphy Ernest Ekpo Thomas Steffens Michael J. Neep Radiographic image interpretation by Australian radiographers: a systematic review Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences General radiography image interpretation radiographer commenting radiography systematic review |
| title | Radiographic image interpretation by Australian radiographers: a systematic review |
| title_full | Radiographic image interpretation by Australian radiographers: a systematic review |
| title_fullStr | Radiographic image interpretation by Australian radiographers: a systematic review |
| title_full_unstemmed | Radiographic image interpretation by Australian radiographers: a systematic review |
| title_short | Radiographic image interpretation by Australian radiographers: a systematic review |
| title_sort | radiographic image interpretation by australian radiographers a systematic review |
| topic | General radiography image interpretation radiographer commenting radiography systematic review |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.356 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT andrewmurphy radiographicimageinterpretationbyaustralianradiographersasystematicreview AT ernestekpo radiographicimageinterpretationbyaustralianradiographersasystematicreview AT thomassteffens radiographicimageinterpretationbyaustralianradiographersasystematicreview AT michaeljneep radiographicimageinterpretationbyaustralianradiographersasystematicreview |