Elsevier

Clinical Radiology

Volume 57, Issue 7, July 2002, Pages 604-607
Clinical Radiology

Regular Article
Double Contrast Barium Enema Sensitivity: A Comparison of Studies by Radiographers and Radiologists

https://doi.org/10.1053/crad.2002.0952Get rights and content

Abstract

PURPOSE: A retrospective study of histologically proven cases of colorectal cancer (CRC) was performed to assess whether the sensitivity of the radiographer-performed double contrast barium enema (DCBE) differed from that of the radiologist-performed study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Histologically proven cases of CRC were reviewed over a 3-year period to ascertain whether: the diagnosis had been made by DCBE in the 3 years before histological diagnosis; the lesion had been correctly diagnosed; the examination had been performed by a radiologist or radiographer. RESULTS: In the 3-year period there were 478 cases with histologically proven CRC. Of these, 239 (50%) had undergone DCBE as the initial radiological investigation of the colon. Sixty-four examinations had been performed by radiographers. A correct diagnosis was made in 58 cases (90.6%), the report was equivocal in one case (1.6%), there were four false-negatives (6.25%), and one case was abandoned (1.6%). One hundred and seventy-five examinations were performed by radiologists. A correct diagnosis was made in 157 cases (89.7%), the report was equivocal in one case (0.6%), there were 16 false-negatives (9.1%), and one case was abandoned (0.6%). CONCLUSION: A sensitivity of 90.6% for radiographer-performed studies compared favourably with 89.7% for radiologist-performed studies and supports the practice of radiographers undertaking barium enemas. Culpan, D. G. et al. (2002). Clinical Radiology57, 604–607.

References (8)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (32)

  • Computed tomography colonography: Radiographer independent preliminary clinical evaluation for intraluminal pathology

    2019, Radiography
    Citation Excerpt :

    Law looked at radiographer reporting of barium enema studies and reported a sensitivity of 98% and specificity of 93% for CRC.36 A comparable study by Culpan reported radiographer sensitivity of 90.6% compared with radiologist sensitivity of 98.7% for CRC.37 These suggest that radiographers can reach and maintain acceptable clinical reporting standards for certain defined areas of practice.38,39

  • Advanced and extended scope practice of diagnostic radiographers in Scotland: Exploring strategic imaging service imperatives

    2017, Radiography
    Citation Excerpt :

    The results from this and the previously published phase of this study9 indicate that there are opportunities for radiographers to take on advanced roles. The success of such roles have been shown in previous research,11,20–22 however the pace of change in Scotland has been shown to be relatively slow and hampered by a variety of factors. The strategic service managers who participated in this study identified various possibilities where change could be beneficial, though this seems to be hampered in many cases by systems and attitudes that do not welcome or facilitate change.

  • An evaluation of radiographer performed and interpreted barium swallows and meals

    2009, Clinical Radiology
    Citation Excerpt :

    These results exceed most other published results of radiographer reporting; a study by Robinson22 in 1996, comparing radiographer and radiologist plain film reports identified an agreement rate of 88%. Pearson23 (2001) reported DCBE agreement rates of 95.1%, and Culpan et al.24 (2002) reported 89.7% sensitivity for radiographers and 90.6% for radiologists for colorectal cancer detection in barium enemas. Two errors affected patient management; one patient returned to clinic with persisting symptoms, and the second patient would probably also have returned with persistent symptoms had the radiologist not double-reported the examination.

View all citing articles on Scopus
f1

Author for correspondence and guarantor of study: Dr. A. H. Chapman, Department of Radiology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds LS9 7TF, U.K. Fax: 0113 2836951; E-mail: AnthonyH [email protected]

View full text