Abstract
In order to compare the merits of conventional and double contrast barium enemas in the hands of radiologists without special experience in either, 299 patients were randomly allocated into 2 groups. Conventional examinations were done in 148 and double contrast examinations in 151. The films were analysed for technical quality and abnormalities. Despite the patients having had identical preparation, residual faeces was found to be a more frequent problem with the conventional enema, whereas other technical faults were found more frequently with the double contrast enema. There was no significant difference in the frequency of abnormalities shown by the 2 techniques.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
