Impact
Radiographic film quality - Impact assessment of training
|
Assessment
criteria
|
Pre-training
1992 & 1995 |
April
2003 |
July
2003 |
November
2003 |
Average
2003 |
%
Improvement
post training |
|
Projection
|
61%
|
86%
|
92%
|
82%
|
86.6%
|
25.6%
|
|
Exposure
|
56%
|
69%
|
79%
|
91%
|
79.6%
|
23.6%
|
|
Processing
|
61%
|
100%
|
95%
|
100%
|
98.3%
|
37.3%
|
|
Other
|
35%
|
76%
|
79%
|
85%
|
80%
|
45%
|
Projection
: Is judged upon whether the view taken was the correct one and its accuracy
of positioning
Exposure : Use of Kv, mAs, screen speed to achieve correct density and contrast on radiograph.
Processing : Assesses film fogging, damage, chemical contamination.
Other : Collimation of beam, anatomical side markers, patient identification/demographics.
Exposure : Use of Kv, mAs, screen speed to achieve correct density and contrast on radiograph.
Processing : Assesses film fogging, damage, chemical contamination.
Other : Collimation of beam, anatomical side markers, patient identification/demographics.
Summary
The above assessment relates only to image quality and this alone has achieved considerable improvement. However, there are additional benefits of radiography training, including:
-
Improvements in image quality increase diagnostic potential and therefore reduce risk of litigation from missed diagnoses.
-
Enhanced image quality supports benefits from specialist opinion via Teleradiology.
-
Substantial improvements in beam collimation, anatomical markers and patient I D further reduce potential for litigation.
-
Improved radiation protection for staff and patients significantly reduces radiation dose.
-
Continuing Professional Development for staff and related benefits in recruitment and retention.
|
|
|
|