Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSnaith, Beverly
dc.contributor.authorField, L.
dc.contributor.authorLewis, E.F.
dc.contributor.authorFlintham, K.
dc.date.accessioned2019-07-05T16:12:02Z
dc.date.accessioned2019-07-10T09:10:14Z
dc.date.available2019-07-05T16:12:02Z
dc.date.available2019-07-10T09:10:14Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier.citationSnaith B, Field L Lewis EF et al (2019) Variation in pelvic radiography practice: Why can we not standardise image acquisition techniques? Radiography. Accepted for Publication.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10454/17164
dc.descriptionYesen_US
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Pelvic radiographs remain an essential investigation in orthopaedic practice. Although it is recognised that acquisition techniques can affect image appearances and measurement accuracy, it remains unclear what variation in practice exists and what impact this could have on decision making. Method: This was a cross sectional survey of UK radiology departments utilising an electronic tool. An introductory letter and link was distributed. Responses were received from 69 unique hospital sites within the specified timeframe, a response rate of 37.9%. Results: There was no consistent technique for the positioning of patients for pelvic radiographs. The distance varied between 90 and 115 cm and 10 different centering points were described. In relation to leg position, the feet are usually internally rotated (65 of 69 [94.2%]). Only 1 teaching hospital (1 of 69 [1.4%]) uses a weight-bearing position as standard. Orthopaedic calibration devices were not in routine use, with only 21 using on pelvic x-rays (30.4%). Further, the type of device and application criteria were inconsistent. Conclusions: To our knowledge this is the first study to directly compare radiographic positioning across hospital sites. Our data demonstrated marked variation in technique for pelvis radiographs with associated implications for clinical decision making. Research is required to determine the standard technique and quality outcome measures to provide confidence in diagnostic interpretation particularly for serial radiographs.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipCollege of Radiographers Industry Partnership Scheme (CoRIPS).en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.isreferencedbyhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2019.05.005en_US
dc.rights© 2019 The College of Radiographers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Reproduced in accordance with the publisher's self-archiving policy. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license.en_US
dc.subjectPelvisen_US
dc.subjectHipen_US
dc.subjectX-rayen_US
dc.subjectRadiographyen_US
dc.subjectTechniqueen_US
dc.subjectSurveyen_US
dc.titleVariation in pelvic radiography practice: Why can we not standardise image acquisition techniques?en_US
dc.status.refereedYesen_US
dc.date.Accepted2019-05-20
dc.date.application2019-06-06
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.date.EndofEmbargo2020-06-07
dc.type.versionAccepted manuscripten_US
dc.description.publicnotesThe full-text of this article will be released for public view at the end of the publisher embargo on 07 June 2020.en_US
dc.date.updated2019-07-05T15:12:04Z
refterms.dateFOA2019-07-10T09:10:35Z


Item file(s)

Thumbnail
Name:
Meteorhipmanuscriptfinalversio ...
Embargo:
2020-06-07
Size:
321.3Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Snaith_Radiography

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record