Obaro, Anu E;
Plumb, Andrew A;
Halligan, Steve;
Mallett, Susan;
Bassett, Paul;
McCoubrie, Paul;
Baldwin-Cleland, Rachel;
... Burling, David; + view all
(2022)
Colorectal Cancer: Performance and Evaluation for CT Colonography Screening— A Multicenter Cluster-randomized Controlled Trial.
Radiology
, 303
(2)
, Article 211456. 10.1148/radiol.211456.
Preview |
Text
Mallett_radiol.211456.pdf Download (1MB) | Preview |
Abstract
Background: Most radiologists reporting CT colonography (CTC) do not undergo compulsory performance accreditation, potentially lowering diagnostic sensitivity. / Purpose: To determine whether 1-day individualized training in CTC reporting improves diagnostic sensitivity of experienced radiologists for 6-mm or larger lesions, the durability of any improvement, and any associated factors. / Materials and Methods: This prospective, multicenter cluster-randomized controlled trial was performed in National Health Service hospitals in England and Wales between April 2017 and January 2020. CTC services were cluster randomized into intervention (1-day training plus feedback) or control (no training or feedback) arms. Radiologists in the intervention arm attended a 1-day workshop focusing on CTC reporting pitfalls with individualized feedback. Radiologists in the control group received no training. Sensitivity for 6-mm or larger lesions was tested at baseline and 1, 6, and 12 months thereafter via interpretation of 10 CTC scans at each time point. The primary outcome was the mean difference in per-lesion sensitivity between arms at 1 month, analyzed using multilevel regression after adjustment for baseline sensitivity. Secondary outcomes included per-lesion sensitivity at 6- and 12-month follow-up, sensitivity for flat neoplasia, and effect of prior CTC experience. / Results: A total of 69 hospitals were randomly assigned to the intervention (31 clusters, 80 radiologists) or control (38 clusters, 59 radiologists) arm. Radiologists were experienced (median, 500–999 CTC scans interpreted) and reported CTC scans routinely (median, 151–200 scans per year). One-month sensitivity improved after intervention (66.4% [659 of 992]) compared with sensitivity in the control group (42.4% [278 of 655]; difference = 20.8%; 95% CI: 14.6, 27.0; P < .001). Improvements were maintained at 6 (66.4% [572 of 861] vs 50.5% [283 of 560]; difference = 13.0%; 95% CI: 7.4, 18.5; P < .001) and 12 (63.7% [310 of 487] vs 44.4% [187 of 421]; difference = 16.7%; 95% CI: 10.3, 23.1; P < .001) months. This beneficial effect applied to flat lesions (difference = 22.7%; 95% CI: 15.5, 29.9; P < .001) and was independent of career experience (≥1500 CTC scans: odds ratio = 1.09; 95% CI: 0.88, 1.36; P = .22). / Conclusion: For radiologists evaluating CT colonography studies, a 1-day training intervention yielded sustained improvement in detection of clinically relevant colorectal neoplasia, independent of previous career experience.
Archive Staff Only
 |
View Item |
