MR CG Audit April 2006

Further comparison of the technical merit and quality of the reports of magnetic resonance imaging examinations performed by an independent sector provider using mobile MR systems (MR Fastrack) with those from standard NHS MR services (Audit 2). A second report prepared by the Royal College of Radiologists, in conjunction with the Department of Health (England), April 2006. Summary 1. Radiological reports were generated by the Independent Sector Provider (ISP) faster than at the two NHS centres reviewed although the time taken for the reports to then get back to the referring clinician was not evaluated. 2. There was little overall difference in the technical quality of the MR examinations between the two services overall, although the best images were generated in an NHS Teaching Hospital. 3. The language of the reports was judged slightly better in NHS generated reports. 4. There was little overall difference in the clinical opinion between the ISP and NHS reports. Amongst 110 examinations, five discrepancies in the reports were identified which could be regarded as General Medical Council Grade 3; three in 61 ISP reports and two in 49 NHS reports. There were no Grade 4 discrepancies. 5. This second audit has shown variations in the technical merit of the examinations performed and in the clinical opinions offered amongst different NHS centres. The best results so far have come from a Teaching Hospital. 6. There is ...