I agree with Tim and Peter on this one: I'm not convinced the junior has
done anything wrong. I get the impression your radiologists didn't spot the
abnormality either Rowley; all the more reason why I'd hardly mention it to
the junior, whether or not any harm resulted, as the latter is not directly
relevant to the "error" of misinterpretation.
I've only just looked at the image this evening but found the abnormality
difficult to see until I saw your answer. That may relate to looking at the
3 x 6 image on my computer screen - something I'm not used to compared with
traditional films - or it may relate to my impatience as your answer was
already sitting in my inbox! The former's a bit of a concern to me, however,
as we go live with PACS on Monday! I think I'm going to have to retrain my
"eye" from scratch with the new technology; we'll see.
But pretty much no-one on the list got the correct answer, with perhaps Tony
coming closest, but then he did identify 6 possible abnormalities, 5 of
which were incorrect, so this hardly counts as a confident identification,
does it?
One other point not mentioned so far is to consider getting a radiologist's
opinion "live" whenever you have a challenging plain film like this. After
all, they're paid to provide this service so you might as well use them.
Then, if they can't confidently clear the film it becomes an automatic CT,
as the radiologist himself has to go for a scan if he can't clear the film,
saving you the argument!
AF
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rowley Cottingham" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 10:11 AM
Subject: The cervical spine xray - my answer.
> Now, a further question. How would you deal with a junior who missed this
> abnormality?
>
> /Rowley./
|