Double contrast barium enema sensitivity: a comparison of studies by radiographers and radiologists.
OBJECTIVE
A retrospective study of histologically proven cases of colorectal cancer (CRC) was performed to assess whether the sensitivity of the radiographer-performed double contrast barium enema (DCBE) differed from that of the radiologist-performed study.


METHODS
Histologically proven cases of CRC were reviewed over a 3-year period to ascertain whether: the diagnosis had been made by DCBE in the 3 years before histological diagnosis; the lesion had been correctly diagnosed; the examination had been performed by a radiologist or radiographer.


RESULTS
In the 3-year period there were 478 cases with histologically proven CRC. Of these, 239 (50%) had undergone DCBE as the initial radiological investigation of the colon. Sixty-four examinations had been performed by radiographers. A correct diagnosis was made in 58 cases (90.6%), the report was equivocal in one case (1.6%), there were four false-negatives (6.25%), and one case was abandoned (1.6%). One hundred and seventy-five examinations were performed by radiologists. A correct diagnosis was made in 157 cases (89.7%), the report was equivocal in one case (0.6%), there were 16 false-negatives (9.1%), and one case was abandoned (0.6%).


CONCLUSIONS
A sensitivity of 90.6% for radiographer-performed studies compared favourably with 89.7% for radiologist-performed studies and supports the practice of radiographers undertaking barium enemas.
Culpan
D G
DG
Department of Radiology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK.
Mitchell
A J
AJ
Hughes
S
S
Nutman
M
M
Chapman
A H
AH
D001466:Barium Sulfate; D002983:Clinical Competence; D015179:Colorectal Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D004733:Enema; D004739:England; D005188:False Negative Reactions; D006801:Humans; D011859:Radiography / Q000592:standards; D011871:Radiology / Q000592:standards; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity
D001466:Barium Sulfate