Yes / Objectives
To investigate the impact of radiographer advanced practice on patient outcomes and
health service quality.
Methods
Using the World Health Organisation definition of quality, this review followed the
Centre for Reviews and Dissemination guidance for undertaking reviews in healthcare.
A range of databases were searched using a defined search strategy. Included studies
were assessed for quality using a tool specifically developed for reviewing studies of
diverse designs and data were systematically extracted using electronic data extraction
proforma.
Results
407 articles were identified and reviewed against the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Nine
studies were included in the final review, the majority (n=7) focussing on advanced
radiography practice within the UK. Advanced practice activities considered were
radiographer reporting, leading patient review clinics and barium enema examinations.
The papers were generally considered to be of low to moderate quality with most
evaluating advanced practice within a single centre. With respect to specific quality
dimensions, included studies considered cost reduction, patient morbidity, time to
treatment and patient satisfaction. No papers reported data relating to time to
diagnosis, time to recovery or patient mortality.
Conclusions
Radiographer advanced practice is an established activity both in the UK and
internationally. However, evidence of the impact of advanced practice in terms of
patient outcomes and service quality is limited.
Advances in knowledge
This systematic review is the first to examine the evidence base surrounding advanced
radiography practice and its impact on patient outcomes and health service quality.
Powered by
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:BRADFORD/oai:bradscholars.brad.ac.uk:10454/8043 |
| Date | 15 April 2016 |
| Creators | Hardy, Maryann L., Johnson, Louise, Sharples, Rachael, Boynes, Stephen, Irving, Donna |
| Source Sets | Bradford Scholars |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Article, Published version |
| Rights | © 2016 The Authors. Published by the British Institute of Radiology. Reproduced in accordance with the publisher's self-archiving policy. |
Page generated in 0.0021 seconds