Article Sidebar
Published:
Mar 18, 2020Keywords:
Article Details
The author(s) retain copyright on work published by AOSIS unless specified otherwise.
Licensing and publication rights
Author(s) of work published by AOSIS are required to grant AOSIS the unlimited rights to publish the definitive work in any format, language and medium, for any lawful purpose. AOSIS requires journal authors to publish their work in open access under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence.
The authors retain the non-exclusive right to do anything they wish with the published article(s), provided attribution is given to the applicable journal with details of the original publication, as set out in the official citation of the article published in the journal. The retained right specifically includes the right to post the article on the authors’ or their institution’s websites or in institutional repositories.
Previously published work may have been published under a different licence. We advise the community that if they would like to reuse the work to consult the applicable licence at article level.
Note: If you need to comply with your funding body policy, you can apply for the CC BY license after your manuscript is accepted for publication.
Main Article Content
A radiographic criteria checklist to determine reasons for errors, resulting in sub-optimal routine shoulder projections
Abstract
Background: Optimal shoulder images must adhere to specific radiographic criteria before they are sent to the radiologist for reporting. Repeat x-rays of the shoulder may increase radiation exposure to the patient.
Aim: The aims of this study were to determine whether images adhered to the required radiographic criteria for routine shoulder imaging and to identify possible reasons for non-adherence.
Setting: The study was conducted at an imaging department at a tertiary academic hospital in Bloemfontein, South Africa.
Methods: A criteria checklist compiled from literature was used to evaluate 578 routine shoulder images including anteroposterior (AP) with external rotation and lateral-Y (LAT-Y) projections. The checklist determined whether the shoulder images adhered to the criteria with regard to the anatomy included, positioning and technical factors, such as inclusion of the correct anatomical lead marker. Data were analysed using SAS Version 9.2 statistical software.
Results: More than 80% of the AP external rotation images included unnecessary anatomical structures owing to incorrect centring. In four out of seven criteria pertaining to positioning for AP external rotation imaging, at least 70% of images were performed incorrectly. Four-sided collimation was not present in more than 50% of both AP external rotation and LAT-Y images because of incorrect centring, while more than 30% of shoulder images presented with anatomical digital markers.
Conclusion: The application of criteria required for shoulder imaging must be addressed at the participating imaging department to improve overall patient care. An in-service training session is recommended to enhance the radiographic technique with regard to routine shoulder projections.
Keywords: routine shoulder projections; radiographic criteria; AP external rotation; lateral-Y projections; anatomical structures; radiographic technique.
