We compared images obtained during gastrointestinal fluoroscopy by specially trained and experienced technologists with those obtained by radiology residents to determine if the quality of images was similar between the two groups.
Three senior radiologists examined the fluoroscopic spot films of 80 patients who were divided evenly into four groups : barium enemas performed by technologists, barium enemas performed by residents, gastrointestinal series performed by technologists, and gastrointestinal series performed by residents.
The senior radiologists graded adequacy of visualization of the esophagus, stomach, duodenum, and all parts of the colon.
A grade of 1 was given for poor films, 2 for adequate films, and 3 for good films.
They did not know who performed each study.
For barium enemas, the residents'mean score was slightly higher than that of the technologists (13.5 compared with 12.9).
For gastrointestinal series, residents'mean score was again slightly higher (20.5 compared with 19.7).
In neither case did the difference reach statistical significance.
Fluoroscopic films obtained by residents and by specially trained and experienced technologists for barium enemas or gastrointestinal series were statistically indistinguishable.
Mots-clés Pascal : Gastrointestinal, Appareil digestif, Imagerie médicale, Expérience professionnelle, Etude comparative, Médecin, Etudiant, Qualité image, Technique, Exploration, Homme, Appareil digestif pathologie
Mots-clés Pascal anglais : Gastrointestinal, Digestive system, Medical imagery, Professional experience, Comparative study, Physician, Student, Image quality, Technique, Exploration, Human, Digestive diseases
Notice produite par :
Inist-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique
Cote : 96-0200275
Code Inist : 002B30A05. Création : 199608.