Objective: To determine the film-retake rates and causes in digital radiography comparison to conventional X-rays method.
Study Design: Comparative study.
Place and Duration of Study: Radiology Department, Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi, from January 2004 to December 2006. Patients and Methods: X-rays of different body parts, conducted during the year 2004, with conventional radiography (n=170300), and in 2006 with digital radiography (n=174550), were included in this study. Measurements were done for number of X-rays re-take due to different quality control reasons for both the conventional and digital radiography. Quality control reasons included underexposure, overexposure, positioning errors, patient movements, portable X-rays, grid cutoff, and others (i.e. equipment related) due to which X-ray quality was questionable. Results were expressed in percentages.
Results: A total of 9423 X-rays (5.5%) were repeated in conventional radiography (n=170300) due to underexposure (38%), overexposure (28.5%), positioning errors (25%), portable procedures (4%), patient movement (2%), grid cut-off (0.5%), and others (2%). Underexposure was the most frequently responsible factor for the X-ray repetition as compared to other factors (p<0.001). In digital radiography (n=174550), 1464 X-rays (1%) needed to be repeated, which was significantly less in comparison to X-ray repetition in conventional method of radiography (5.5%) [p<0.001]. In digital radiography, the most frequent factor for X-ray re-take was positioning error (435, 30%).
Conclusion: Digital radiography is associated with significantly lesser number of re-take X-rays as compared to conventional radiography, hence minimizes the exposure of the patients to unnecessary radiations due to re-take X-rays. Positioning error remains a problem even in digital radiography, emphasizing training need for technologists.
Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan
(2008). Film Retakes in Digital and Conventional Radiography. Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan, 18(3), 151-153.
Available at: http://ecommons.aku.edu/pakistan_fhs_mc_radiol/103