4.3 Article

World Federation of Pediatric Imaging (WFPI) volunteer outreach through tele-reading: the pilot project in South Africa

期刊

PEDIATRIC RADIOLOGY
卷 44, 期 6, 页码 648-654

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00247-014-2948-6

关键词

Teleradiology; Pediatrics; Radiography; Outreach; South Africa

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Shortages in radiology services are estimated to affect 3.5-4.7 billion people worldwide. Teleradiology is a potential means of alleviating this shortage. This paper examines the practicality and sustainability of a pilot pediatric teleradiology project at the Khayelitsha District Hospital in sub-Saharan Africa. We analyze how this World Federation of Pediatric Imaging (WFPI) program fares against the global challenges described in the current literature facing these practice types. A teleradiology pilot was developed to provide coverage to the Khayelitsha District Hospital after the district pediatrician requested assistance in interpreting radiographs. This program utilized a network of WFPI volunteer pediatric radiologists, direct JPEG conversion of digital radiographic images, and an e-mail delivery system of images, referral requests and teleradiology opinion. Data were collected retrospectively from referral cards and JPEG images of radiographs, as well as from the volunteer officer database. A total of 555 referral cards and 1,106 radiographs were submitted for teleradiology opinion during the course of this pilot program; 74.6% of requests for image interpretation were chest radiographs and 14.2% of those were for the evaluation of tuberculosis. There were 40 volunteer teleradiologists from 17 countries; all spoke English, and 14 were bilingual (8 fluent in Spanish, 5 in Portuguese, and 1 in Italian). Teleradiology is a viable option to alleviate radiologist shortages in underserved areas, but there are many challenges to designing an adequate teleradiology system. The WFPI pilot teleradiology program can be considered a successful one.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据