2016Pakistan Journal of Medical SciencesOpen access

Does periodic lung screening of films meets standards?

Songül Binay, Peri Arbak, Alp Alper Şafak, Ege Gule, Cahit Bílgín, Naciye KARATAŞ

Open full text 13 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the workers' periodic chest x-ray screening techniques in accordance with the quality standards is the responsibility of physicians. Evaluation of differences of interpretations by physicians in different levels of education and the importance of standardization of interpretation. METHODS: Previously taken chest radiographs of 400 workers who are working in a factory producing the glass run channels were evaluated according to technical and quality standards by three observers (pulmonologist, radiologist, pulmonologist assistant). There was a perfect concordance between radiologist and pulmonologist for the underpenetrated films. Whereas there was perfect concordance between pulmonologist and pulmonologist assistant for over penetrated films. RESULTS: Pulmonologist (52%) has interpreted the dose of the films as regular more than other observers (radiologist; 44.3%, pulmonologist assistant; 30.4%). The frequency of interpretation of the films as taken in inspiratory phase by the pulmonologist (81.7%) was less than other observers (radiologist; 92.1%, pulmonologist assistant; 92.6%). The rate of the pulmonologist (53.5%) was higher than the other observers (radiologist; 44.6%, pulmonologist assistant; 41.8%) for the assessment of the positioning of the patients as symmetrical. Pulmonologist assistant (15.3%) was the one who most commonly reported the parenchymal findings (radiologist; 2.2%, pulmonologist; 12.9%). CONCLUSION: It is necessary to reorganize the technical standards and exposure procedures for improving the quality of the chest radiographs. The reappraisal of all interpreters and continuous training of technicians is required.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the workers' periodic chest x-ray screening techniques in accordance with the quality standards is the responsibility of physicians. Evaluation of differences of interpretations by physicians in different levels of education and the importance of standardization of interpretation. METHODS: Previously taken chest radiographs of 400 workers who are working in a factory producing the glass run channels were evaluated according to technical and quality standards by three observers (pulmonologist, radiologist, pulmonologist assistant). There was a perfect concordance between radiologist and pulmonologist for the underpenetrated films. Whereas there was perfect concordance between pulmonologist and pulmonologist assistant for over penetrated films. RESULTS: Pulmonologist (52%) has interpreted the dose of the films as regular more than other observers (radiologist; 44.3%, pulmonologist assistant; 30.4%). The frequency of interpretation of the films as taken in inspiratory phase by the pulmonologist (81.7%) was less than other observers (radiologist; 92.1%, pulmonologist assistant; 92.6%). The rate of the pulmonologist (53.5%) was higher than the other observers (radiologist; 44.6%, pulmonologist assistant; 41.8%) for the assessment of the positioning of the patients as symmetrical. Pulmonologist assistant (15.3%) was the one who most commonly reported the parenchymal findings (radiologist; 2.2%, pulmonologist; 12.9%). CONCLUSION: It is necessary to reorganize the technical standards and exposure procedures for improving the quality of the chest radiographs. The reappraisal of all interpreters and continuous training of technicians is required.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 13 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the workers' periodic chest x-ray screening techniques in accordance with the quality standards is the responsibility of physicians. Evaluation of differences of interpretations by physicians in different levels of education and the importance of standardization of interpretation. METHODS: Previously taken chest radiographs of 400 workers who are working in a factory producing the glass run channels were evaluated according to technical and quality standards by three observers (pulmonologist, radiologist, pulmonologist assistant). There was a perfect concordance between radiologist and pulmonologist for the underpenetrated films. Whereas there was perfect concordance between pulmonologist and pulmonologist assistant for over penetrated films. RESULTS: Pulmonologist (52%) has interpreted the dose of the films as regular more than other observers (radiologist; 44.3%, pulmonologist assistant; 30.4%). The frequency of interpretation of the films as taken in inspiratory phase by the pulmonologist (81.7%) was less than other observers (radiologist; 92.1%, pulmonologist assistant; 92.6%). The rate of the pulmonologist (53.5%) was higher than the other observers (radiologist; 44.6%, pulmonologist assistant; 41.8%) for the assessment of the positioning of the patients as symmetrical. Pulmonologist assistant (15.3%) was the one who most commonly reported the parenchymal findings (radiologist; 2.2%, pulmonologist; 12.9%). CONCLUSION: It is necessary to reorganize the technical standards and exposure procedures for improving the quality of the chest radiographs. The reappraisal of all interpreters and continuous training of technicians is required.

Key concepts: Pulmonologist, Medicine, Concordance, Pulmonology, Radiology, Intensive care medicine, Internal medicine

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Does periodic lung screening of films meets standards? — Research Paper | ScholarLens