Radiology trainee

放射学培训生
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:影像学指南在放射科医师的培训中发挥重要作用,但他们在居留计划中的采用程度尚不清楚。通过这项调查,欧洲泌尿生殖道放射学学会(ESUR)青少年网络旨在评估ESUR子宫内膜癌MRI分期指南(EC-ESUR指南)在年轻放射科医师中的传播情况.
    方法:设计了针对去年放射科住院医师和放射科医师职业生涯第一年的在线问卷。它包括24个问题,结构分为4个部分(即,背景,一般,采集协议,解释,和报告)。该调查在2022年4月至5月期间进行,接受了全球范围内的答案。通过社交媒体活动并在国家科学协会的支持下征求了答案。使用Wilcoxon秩和检验,根据感兴趣的亚专业和EC-ESUR指南咨询次数等变量进行亚组分析。
    结果:总计,118名参与者填写了问卷,其中94(80%)来自欧洲,46(39%)对泌尿生殖放射学特别感兴趣。总的来说,68(58%)表示该指南不是其住院医师教学计划的一部分,而32(27%)甚至从未咨询过该指南。对泌尿生殖放射学作为亚专科和EC-ESUR指南咨询的兴趣与对监督扫描采集的更大信心相关。口译,并报告ECMRI分期检查。
    结论:出版四年后,在居留计划中采用EC-ESUR指南的程度不同。尽管可能存在选择偏差,我们的研究结果表明,需要积极推广EC-ESUR指南.
    结论:•在放射学住院医师计划中采用关于子宫内膜癌的ESUR指南是异质的。几乎三分之一的受访者表示,他们甚至从未咨询过指南。•接受更多子宫内膜癌MRI分期扫描的患者对指南的信心更高。•阅读指南与对协议获取的更大信心相关,解释,和报告。需要积极努力促进其传播。
    OBJECTIVE: Imaging guidelines could play an important role in the training of radiologists, but the extent of their adoption in residency programs is unclear. With this survey, the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) Junior Network aimed to assess the dissemination of the ESUR guidelines on endometrial cancer MRI staging (EC-ESUR guidelines) among young radiologists.
    METHODS: An online questionnaire targeted to last year radiology residents and radiologists in the first year of their career was designed. It included 24 questions, structured in 4 sections (i.e., background, general, acquisition protocol, interpretation, and reporting). The survey was active between April and May 2022, accepting answers worldwide. Answers were solicited with a social media campaign and with the support of national scientific societies. Subgroup analysis was performed based on variables such as subspecialty of interest and number of EC-ESUR guidelines consultations using the Wilcoxon rank sum test.
    RESULTS: In total, 118 participants completed the questionnaire, of which 94 (80%) were from Europe and 46 (39%) with a special interest in urogenital radiology. Overall, 68 (58%) stated that the guidelines were not part of their residency teaching programs while 32 (27%) had never even consulted the guidelines. Interest in urogenital radiology as a subspecialty and EC-ESUR guidelines consultations were associated with greater confidence in supervising scan acquisition, interpreting, and reporting EC MRI staging exams.
    CONCLUSIONS: Four years after publication, the adoption of EC-ESUR guidelines in residency programs is heterogeneously low. Despite a possible selection bias, our findings indicate that active promotion of EC-ESUR guidelines is required.
    CONCLUSIONS: • The adoption of ESUR guidelines on endometrial cancer in radiology residency programs is heterogeneous. • Almost one third of respondents stated they had never even consulted the guidelines. • Confidence toward guidelines was higher in those who were exposed to more endometrial cancer MRI staging scans. • Reading the guidelines was associated with a greater confidence in protocol acquisition, interpretation, and reporting. • Active efforts to promote their dissemination are required.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:放射科医师和推荐人之间的主要沟通是通过放射学报告进行的。然而,在放射科医生培训期间有误解的事件。因此,本研究旨在评估我们机构放射科受训者中普通射线照片的准确性和解释错误的发生率。
    方法:本研究回顾性回顾了508例一年的平片,两名放射科医生随后评估了这些平片。将受训者的初步诊断与放射科医生的评估进行比较,结果被归类为“准确”,\'小差异\',或“重大差异”。对总体性能的数据进行了分析,受训一年,解剖面积,患者年龄组,和X光片类型。进行了卡方检验,p<0.05表示有统计学意义。
    结果:总体准确率为69%,轻微和主要差异率为21%和10%,分别。随着训练年限的增加,总体准确性略有提高,尽管三年级学员的准确率降低到58%。在第1年,第2年和第4年之间,精度水平提高了70%,71%和75%,分别为(p>0.05)。成人和儿童年龄组的准确率均无统计学意义。移动X射线照片的报告准确率低于普通X射线照片。
    结论:放射学受训者对普通射线照片的解释具有平均评分,差异率低。与其他受训者组相比,3年级受训者的准确性最低。然而,本研究表明,需要进一步的研究,以确定当前的结果是异常值或指示一个真实的现象。
    Introduction: The primary communication between the radiologist and referrer is through the radiological report. However, there are incidents of misinterpretation during radiologist training. Therefore, the present study aimed to evaluate the accuracy level and incidence of interpretation errors for plain radiographs among radiology trainees at our institution. Materials and Methods: The present study retrospectively reviewed 508 reported plain radiographs for one year, and two radiologists subsequently evaluated these plain radiographs. The initial diagnosis by the trainee was compared with the radiologists’ evaluation, and the results were categorized as either ‘accurate’, ‘minor discrepancy’, or ‘major discrepancy’. The data were analyzed concerning the overall performance, year of trainee, anatomic area, patient age group, and radiograph type. A chi-square test was performed, with p < 0.05 indicating statistical significance. Results: The overall accuracy rate was 69%, with minor and major discrepancy rates of 21% and 10%, respectively. There was an insignificant increase in overall accuracy with increased years of training, despite a reduction to 58% accuracy among Year 3 trainees. The accuracy level increased between Year 1, Year 2 and Year 4 by 70%, 71% and 75%, respectively (p > 0.05). The accuracy rates for both the adult and pediatric age groups were not statistically significant. The mobile radiographs showed lower accuracy rate of reporting than the plain radiographs. Conclusion: The radiological trainee interpretations for plain radiographs had an average rating with low discrepancy rates. The Year 3 trainees had the lowest accuracy compared to the other trainee groups. However, the present study suggests the need for further research to determine if the current outcomes are outliers or are indicative of a real phenomenon.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号