Computed tomography (CT) head scans reported by an experienced CT radiographer

Abstract

Skill mix is under review in many radiology departments with radiographers undertaking more clinical responsibilities. We present the results of a study comparing the accuracy of reports on computed tomography (CT) head scans by an experienced CT radiographer and a group of five Senior Registrar radiologists. Both were compared with the report of the Consultant Radiologist which was used as the gold standard. Eighty-one consecutive patients (36 male, 45 female, mean age 71 years) were included in the study over a period of 2 weeks. Forty-eight examinations were abnormal; and 33 were normal. There was complete concordance in 71 cases (87%) with 10 discordant results (13%). Overall sensitivity was 85.4% for the radiographer and 87.5% for the senior registrars. Specificity was 96.9% for the radiographer and 93.9% for the senior registrars. Analysis of significant errors only, that is those which might adversely affect patient management, showed a sensitivity of 93.7% for both observers. Specificity for the radiographer was 100% compared with 96.9% for the group of radiologists. We conclude that the possibility that certain experienced and appropriately trained CT radiographers could report routine CT head scans merits further evaluation.