National audit of the sensitivity of double-contrast barium enema for colorectal carcinoma, using control charts For the Royal College of Radiologists Clinical Radiology Audit Sub-Committee

• Published in: Clinical radiology 2005-05, Vol.60 (5), p.558-564
• Main Authors: Tawn, D J, Squire, C J, Mohammed, M A, Adam, E J
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Barium Sulfate; Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging; Contrast Media; Enema; Humans; Medical Audit - methods; Quality Assurance, Health Care - methods; Radiography; Radiology Department, Hospital - standards; Sensitivity and Specificity; State Medicine - standards; Statistics as Topic; United Kingdom
• ISSN: 0009-9260
• DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2004.09.014

To audit the sensitivity of double-contrast barium enema (DCBE) for colorectal carcinoma, as currently practised in UK departments of radiology. As part of its programme of national audits, the Royal College of Radiologists Clinical Radiology Audit Sub-Committee undertook a retrospective audit of the sensitivity of DCBE for colorectal carcinoma during 2002. The following targets were set: demonstration of a lesion > or =95%; correct identification as a carcinoma > or =90%. Across the UK, 131 departments took part in the audit, involving 5454 examinations. The mean demonstration rate was 92.9% and the diagnosis rate was 85.9%, slightly below the targets set. The equivocal rate (lesion demonstrated, but not defined as malignant) was 6.9%, the perception failure rate was 2.8% and the technical failure rate was 4.4%. Control-chart methodology was used to analyze the data and to identify any departments whose performance was consistent with special-cause variation. When compared with the diagnosis rate (84.6%) and demonstration rate (92.7%) reported in the Wessex Audit 1995, [Thomas RD, Fairhurst JJ, Frost RA. Wessex regional audit: barium enema in colo-rectal carcinoma. Clin Radiol 1995;50:647-50.] a similar level of performance was observed in the NHS today, implying that the basic process for undertaking and reporting DCBE has remained relatively unchanged over the last few years. Improvement in the future will require fundamental changes to the process of reporting DCBE, in order to minimize the perception failure rate and accurately to describe lesions, so reducing the equivocal rate. Control-chart methodology has a useful role in identifying strategies to deliver continual improvement.