Skip to main content
. 2018 Jun 14;9(5):721–730. doi: 10.1007/s13244-018-0635-0

Table 6.

Variation in radiographer responses in specifying the appropriate error-correction strategy for MR image-quality errors

Correction Strategy Group Control N = 16 Experimental N = 19 Number of images Total Number of responses Number (%) correct (pre-test) Number (%) Dis-improved Number (%) incorrect (pre-test) Number (%) improved
Change Sequence parameters Control 4 64 15 (23.4%) 4 (26.7%) 49 (76.6%) 5 (10.2%)
Experimental 76 17 (22.4%) 1 (5.9%) 59 (77.6%) 42 (71.2%)
Patient setup issue Control 2 32 19 (59.4%) 5 (26.3%) 13 (40.6%) 1 (7.7%)
Experimental 38 28 (73.7%) 0 (0%) 10 (26.3%) 8 (80%)
Change timing parameters Control 3 48 19 (39.6%) 4 (21.1%) 29 (60.4%) 2 (6.9%)
Experimental 57 22 (38.6%) 0 (0%) 35 (61.4%) 34 (97.1%)
Artefact Control 3 48 24 (50%) 3 (12.5%) 24 (50%) 2 (8.3%)
Experimental 57 27 (47.4%) 1 (3.7%) 30 (52.6%) 19 (63.3%)
Correct RF coil Control 3 48 12 (25%) 4 (33.3%) 36 (75%) 5 (13.9%)
Experimental 57 18 (31.6%) 6 (33.3%) 39 (68.4%) 16 (41%)
Change scanning technique Control 5 80 19 (23.8%) 5 (26.3%) 61 (76.3%) 3 (4.9%)
Experimental 95 23 (24.2%) 3 (13%) 72 (75.8%) 56 (77.8%)
No technical error evident Control 5 80 62 (77.5%) 6 (9.7%) 18 (22.5%) 6 (33.3%)
Experimental 95 73 (76.9%) 7 (9.6%) 22 (23.2%) 19 (86.4%)