Aim: The aim of this study was to explore what the core domain of research means to consultant radiographers in clinical practice and to identify the key factors that facilitate or hinder research activity by this staff group. Design: Grounded theory research methodology was employed. There were three phases to the study: • Literature review. • Electronic questionnaires to all those in consultant radiographer posts as identified by the Society and College of Radiographers consultant radiographer network. • Twenty five consultant radiographers invited for telephone interview. Results: Results indicate there are variations across clinical specialties as to the amount and level of research undertaken by consultant radiographers. The principal barriers revealed were: lack of time; excessive clinical workload; lack of skills and confidence to undertake research; poor research culture; and lack of support. The main facilitators noted were: dedicated time, research training and up-skilling; mutually beneficial collaborations; managerial understanding of the research domain of the role; and research focussed on clinical demand. Conclusion: Research is one of the four core domains of consultant allied health professional and nursing roles but, as yet, it is not fully embedded into those of all consultant radiographers. Many consultant radiographers appear to spend more of their time on the ‘clinical expert’ element of their role at the expense of the research domain. This research identified factors, from the consultant radiographers’ perspective, that both support and hinder research and suggests that, with ‘an intelligent overview’, some of barriers could be overcome. This study concludes that there is an urgent need for consultant radiographers to understand why research is one of the four core domains and to recognise the need to embed research into their clinical practice.

Yes / Objective: Clinical Imaging contributes to screening, diagnosis, planning and monitoring of treatment and surveillance in cancer care. This literature review summarises evidence about radiographer reporting to help imaging service providers respond to Health Education England's 2017 Cancer Workforce Plan project to expand radiographer reporting in clinical service provision. Key findings: Papers published between 1992 and 2018 were reviewed (n ¼ 148). Evidence related to dynamic examinations (fluoroscopy, ultrasound) and mammography was excluded. Content was analysed and summarised using the following headings: clinical scope of practice, responsibilities, training, assessment, impact in practice and barriers to expansion. Radiographer reporting is well established in the United Kingdom. Scope of practice varies individually and geographically. Deployment of appropriately trained reporting radiographers is helping the NHS maintain high quality clinical imaging service provision and deliver a cost-effective increase in diagnostic capacity. Conclusion: Working within multiprofessional clinical imaging teams, within a defined scope of practice and with access to medical input when required, reporting radiographers augment capacity in diagnostic pathways and release radiologist time for other complex clinical imaging responsibilities.

No / Introduction: Radiographer abnormality detection schemes (RADS) were first introduced in the United Kingdom (UK) in the mid 1980s with the development of the ‘red dot scheme’. This article establishes the current position of UK RADS practice and provides insight into specific areas for development. Method: A postal questionnaire was distributed to 456 sites, including 270 emergency departments and 186 minor injuries units (MIU). Information was sought relating to: the type of emergency department and radiography service provided; details of RADS operated including any education and audit to support radiographer participation; and the mandatory/voluntary nature of the system adopted. Results: A total of 306 (n = 306/456; 74%) responses were received. The large majority of respondents (n = 284/306; 92.8%) indicated that a RADS was in operation. Of these, 221 sites operated a red dot scheme, 7 sites operated a radiographer comment system, and a further 54 sites operated both a red dot and comment scheme. Two sites indicated that a RADS other than red dot or radiographer commenting was operated. Twenty-one different methods of highlighting abnormal images were identified and eight different commenting methods. The RADS was considered mandatory at 25% of sites. Conclusion: This study confirms the continued widespread contribution of radiographers to the trauma diagnostic process through the use of RADS. The informal nature of the systems, inconsistent approaches to audit and education, and variations in the methods employed are issues which require national guidance.

Background: Ultrasound is safe and painless, produces pictures of the inside of the body using sound waves (not use ionizing radiation), thus there is no radiation exposure to the patient. The thyroid gland is among the most commonly imaged glands using ultrasound due to the limitation of clinical examination. The Radiographers' skills in ultrasound differ according to the country and the basic formations. And throught this study we want to emphasize about the role of radiographer. Aim: The porpuse of this study is determine the volume and morphological characteristics of normal thyroid order to get reference values for young adults. Material and Method: We selected 204 students consist of male and female from Danang University of Medical Technology And Pharmacy were studied. Mean age of our subjects was 22 (range 18-25) all of them were healthy and with normal thyroid gland status. Descriptive statistics and analytic statistic was used. Results: In our study, the thyroid volume between female and male is different. The total thyroid volume significantly correlated with individual’s height, weight, body surface area and body mass index. The mean of total thyroid volume was 7.44 ± 2.09ml (range 3.51-14.57). The thyroid volume was best correlated with height (r = 0.44; p = 0.0001). Conclusion: Knowledge about the size of the thyroid gland is important in following the thyroid diseases and the examination of the gland. The radiographer's role is very important in determining the volume of thyroid.Radiographer is an important member of the diagnostic health care team.

No / Despite the United Kingdom College of Radiographers aspiration that first line reporting or commenting by radiographers be normal practice, radiographers have not as yet embraced these opportunities in clinical practice and the number of radiographer commenting (initial reporting) schemes in operation is currently limited. This study explores radiographer opinion with regard to commenting with the aim of establishing the perceived opportunities and barriers to operating a commenting scheme with respect to trauma radiography. Method A survey of 79 radiographers working within a single multi-centre Trust in the north of England was undertaken using a questionnaire. Attitudinal statements were used to elicit information on perceived opportunities and barriers to the implementation of radiographer commenting. Results Fifty three questionnaires were returned within the specified time frame (n-53/79; 67.1%). A number of barriers to implementing a commenting scheme were identified including time, technology, anatomical confidence and training. Opportunities included improving professional profile and increased professional contribution to decision making within the patient pathway. No correlation was demonstrated between respondent demographic and responses suggesting that opinions expressed were not influenced by hospital site, radiographer grade or years experience. Conclusion Radiographers generally had a positive attitude towards the implementation of radiographer commenting and felt that their operation was both beneficial to patient care and the professional profile of radiographers. However, a number of barriers were identified and while concerns regarding training may be increasingly addressed by the Department of Health’s e-learning image interpretation package, the impact of changes in technology and subsequent service operation have not yet been fully evaluated.

Yes / Introduction: Child safeguarding and the appropriate identification of suspected victims represents a global phenomenon. Diagnostic imaging is acknowledged as a contributory diagnostic service but the role of the radiographer in the identification and escalation process is less well understood. Method: A Knowledge, Attitude and Practice (KAP) survey was constructed to evaluate knowledge base in the context of the patient–radiographer interaction, the shaping of attitude towards child safeguarding and attitudes held towards their role plus the actual practical experiences of managing child safeguarding concerns. Results: Respondents demonstrated a inconsistent knowledge base with respect to physical, social and radiographic signs and symptoms of child safeguarding concern. A positive attitude towards the role of the radiographer in child safeguarding was demonstrated but one that was shaped more by experience than pre-registration education. Assessment of concerns was chiefly influenced by clinical history and appreciation of aetiology. Practically, radiographers have infrequent involvement with the identification and escalation of concerns. Whilst some statistically significant relationships between responses and demographics did exist, these were either sporadic or argued to be a result of natural variation. Conclusion: Assessment of physical and social signs of child safeguarding concern are argued to be becoming more challenging. Radiological signs continue to be visible to radiographers but with increasing use of other imaging modalities these signs are becoming more varied in nature and are providing new challenges. Radiographers are capable of escalation when required to do so. Implications for practice: To maximise the contribution of the profession, education needs to account for imaging modality worked with, in combination with an understanding of related aetiology. Previously existing concerns with respect to escalating processes are no longer in evidence and radiographers are both willing and able to contribute to that process.

No / Immediate reporting, commonly referred to as a ‘hot reporting’, has been advocated as a method of effectively supporting clinical decision making. However, its implementation nationally has been limited with poor understanding of its value in practice. A cross sectional attitudinal survey was distributed to emergency department clinicians (medical and nursing staff) and radiographers to explore perceptions of an immediate reporting service in terms of its influence on professional role and autonomy, patient care and service quality. A total of 87 (n = 87/155; 56.1%) completed questionnaires were returned. The findings suggest that significant support for immediate reporting exists. Immediate reporting is believed to improve service quality, reduce clinical errors and provide opportunity for image interpretation skills development. However, responses were not consistent across clinical professions and staff grades. The immediate reporting of emergency department images is perceived to benefit patient, emergency department clinicians and hospital organisation.

No / Advanced practice roles are emerging in all disciplines at a rapid pace and reporting radiographers are ideally placed to work at such level. Advanced practitioners should demonstrate expert practice and show progression into three other areas of higher level practice. Most existing literature has focussed on the image interpretation aspect of the role, however there is little evidence that plain film reporting radiographers are undertaking activities beyond image interpretation and fulfilling the role of advanced practitioner. Letters were posted to every acute NHS trust in the UK, inviting reporting radiographers to complete an online survey. Both quantitative and qualitative information was sought regarding demographics and roles supplementary to reporting. A total of 205 responses were analysed; 83.3% of reporting radiographers describe themselves as advanced practitioner, however significantly less are showing progression into the four core functions of higher level practice. A total of 97.0% undertake expert practice, 54.7% have a leadership role, 19.8% provide expert lectures and 71.1% have roles encompassing service development or research, though most of these fall into the service development category. 34.5% felt that they were aware of the differences between extended and advanced practice though much less (9.3%) could correctly articulate the difference. Few individuals are aware of the difference between extended and advanced practice. Though the majority of plain film reporting radiographers identify themselves as advanced practitioners, significantly less evidence all four core functions of higher level practice. The number of individuals undertaking research and providing expert-level education is low.

No / Radiography aspires to be a research active profession, but there is limited information regarding the number of individuals with, or studying for, a doctoral award. This study aims to profile UK doctoral radiographers; including their chosen award, approach and employment status. This was a prospective cohort study utilising an electronic survey. No formal database of doctoral radiographers existed therefore a snowball sampling method was adopted. The study sample was radiographers (diagnostic and therapeutic) based in the UK who were registered with the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) and who held, or were studying for, a doctoral award. A total of 90 unique responses were received within the timescale. The respondents comprised 58 females (64.4%) and the majority were diagnostic radiographers (n = 71/90; 78.9%). The traditional PhD was the most common award, although increasing numbers were pursuing Education or Professional Doctorates. An overall increase in doctoral studies is observed over time, but was greatest amongst those working in academic institutions, with 63.3% of respondents (n = 57/90) working solely within a university, and a further 10% employed in a clinical–academic role (n = 9/90). This study has demonstrated that radiography is emerging as a research active profession, with increasing numbers of radiographers engaged in study at a doctoral level. This should provide a platform for the future development of academic and clinical research.

Yes / Introduction: Consultant posts were developed to strengthen strategic leadership whilst maintaining front line service responsibilities and clinical expertise. The nursing profession has attempted to develop tools to enable individuals to evaluate their own practice and consider relevant measurable outcomes. This study evaluated the feasibility of transferring such a nursing ‘toolkit’ to another health profession. Method: This evaluation was structured around a one-day workshop where a nurse consultant impact toolkit was appraised and tested within the context of consultant radiographic practice. The adapted toolkit was subsequently validated using a larger sample at a national meeting of consultant radiographers. Results: There was broad agreement that the tools could be adopted for use by radiographers although several themes emerged in relation to perceived gaps within the nursing template, confirming the initial exercise. This resulted in amendments to the original scope and a proposed new evaluation tool. Conclusion: The impact toolkit could help assess individual and collaborat ive role impact at a local and national level. The framework provides consultant radiographers with an opportunity to understand and highlight the contribution their roles have on patients, staff, their organisation and the wider profession.