The radiology quality assurance process in the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial, and findings from the baseline round of low dose CT screening for lung cancer

Author:

Upperton Sara E C1,Bradley Claire2,Bhartia Bobby S K3,Crosbie Philip A J4,Darby Michael3,Gabe Rhian5,Hammond Christopher3,Hancock Neil6,Marshall Catriona6,Kennedy Martyn P T1,Callister Matthew1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Respiratory Medicine, Leeds Teaching Hospitals, Leeds, United Kingdom

2. Department of Respiratory Medicine, Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, United Kingdom

3. Department of Radiology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals, Leeds, United Kingdom

4. Division of Infection, Immunity and Respiratory Medicine, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom

5. Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom

6. Leeds Diagnosis and Screening Unit, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom

Abstract

Objective: As lung cancer screening is rolled-out, there is a need to develop an effective quality assurance (QA) framework around radiology reporting to ensure optimal implementation. Here, we report a structured QA process for low-dose CT (LDCT) scans performed in the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial. Methods: Negative LDCT scans were single read after using computer-aided detection software. The radiology QA process included reviewing 5% of negative scans selected at random, and all cases with a subsequent diagnosis of extrapulmonary cancer or interval lung cancer not detected on the baseline scan. Radiologists were not informed of the reason for review and original radiology reports were scored as either “satisfactory”, “satisfactory with learning points”, or “unsatisfactory”. Results: From 6650 participants undergoing LDCT screening, 208 negative scans were reviewed alongside 11 cases with subsequent extrapulmonary cancer and 10 cases with interval lung cancer. Overall, only three reports were ultimately judged “unsatisfactory”, 1% of randomly selected negative scans (n = 2/208) and one interval lung cancer scan (n = 1/10). Four out of a total of five cases judged “satisfactory with learning points” were related to oesophageal abnormalities where the participant was subsequently diagnosed with oesophageal cancer. Conclusion: The described process attempts to minimise bias in retrospective review of screening scans, and may represent a framework for future QA of national screening programmes. Advances in knowledge: This study describes a structured QA process for a lung cancer screening programme, involving blinded second-read of LDCT screening scans to ensure fair, constructive audit of clinical performance.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging,General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3