Radiographic Anatomy

Posted on Updated on

Adult

Head

Thorax

Vertebral   Column

Abdomen

  •   Abdomen
  •   Abdomen   – IVU (IVP)
  •   Abdomen   – Barium Enema
  •   Abdomen   – Barium SBS
  •   Abdomen   – Barium Meal

Shoulder

Upper   Extremities

Pelvis

Lower   Extremities

Pediatric

Head

 

Thorax

 

Vertebral   Column

 

Abdomen

 

Shoulder

Upper   Extremeties

Pelvis

Lower   Extremities

Male   Bone Age Atlas

Left   Hand

 

2 thoughts on “Radiographic Anatomy

    Invoicenell said:
    February 27, 2013 at 11:45 pm

    I’m sometimes to blogging and i honestly appreciate your content. The post has honestly peaks my interest. I’m going to bookmark your site and keep checking for new information.

    Radiology News said:
    February 14, 2013 at 9:14 pm

    Mammo by the numbers: Benchmarks help identify MDs who don’t make the grade

    By Evan GodtFeb 14, 2013

    – thumbs up, approval, thumb, woman, female, woman
    If underperforming physicians received interventions to boost performance on newly developed criteria for diagnostic mammography, the result would be an increase in cancer diagnosis and a reduction of false-positives, according to an article published online Jan. 7 in Radiology.

    Patricia A. Carney, PhD, of Oregon Health and Science University in Portland, and colleagues created the performance thresholds for physicians interpreting diagnostic mammography studies based on a review of National Cancer Institute data.

    “Identifying low performers who might benefit from additional training should lead to more accurate and cost-effective diagnostic mammography,” wrote the authors.

    Cutoff points were established to identify performance measures which could indicate remedial training is required. Final cut points for workup of abnormal screening exams were:

    •Sensitivity less than 80 percent
    •Specificity less than 80 percent or greater than 95 percent
    •Abnormal interpretation rate less than 8 percent or greater than 25 percent
    •Positive predictive value (PPV) of biopsy recommendation less than 15 percent or greater than 40 percent
    •PPV of biopsy performed less than 20 percent or greater than 45 percent
    •Cancer diagnosis rate less than 20 per 1,000 interpretations
    Cut points for workup of a breast lump were:

    •Sensitivity less than 85 percent
    •Specificity less than 83 percent or greater than 95 percent
    •Abnormal interpretation rate less than 10 percent or greater than 25 percent
    •PPV of biopsy recommendation less than 25 percent or greater than 50 percent
    •PPV of biopsy performed less than 30 percent or greater than 55 percent
    •Cancer diagnosis rate less than 40 per 1,000 interpretations
    Criteria were based on an examination of Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) data, according to Carney and colleagues. They explained that the outcome measures that include both an upper and lower bound for acceptability, such as abnormal interpretation rate, reflect concern for limiting false-positives.

    “This is because too high an abnormal interpretation rate, which typically results in a low PPV and specificity, may indicate an excessive number of abnormal assessments, resulting in increased false-positives and a low probability of diagnosing cancer among women with a positive assessment,” wrote the authors.

    Carney and colleagues also used BCSC data to estimate the expected clinical impact of the thresholds. If every physician’s performance was moved into an acceptable range, an additional

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s