In radiology, good image quality is the prerequisite for accurate diagnosis and appropriate treatment decisions. While chest radiography isone of the most frequently performed imaging procedures [1],achieving consistently optimal image quality continues to be a challenge [2,3]. Theunderlying reasons for this are manifold, but include declining education, changing communication behavior due to digitalization and time-constraints [4]. At the same time, perceived image quality differs quite significantly among individual observers [5,6]. Among the observed image quality shortcomings, positioning errors are the most frequently encountered [7]. In...

A total of 920 adult PA chest radiographs were assessed by sixclinical expertsfrom three European hospitals (two raters from each hospital) with regard to positioning quality. The images were selected from a publically available Chest X-raydataset [9] to constitute a representative distribution of positioning quality. The assessment was performed using a standardized rating tool. The evaluated quality aspects were based on the “European Guidelines on Quality Criteria for Diagnostic Radiographic Images” [10]: (a) Field of view, in which each side of the image was rated...

The assessment by the readers across all hospitals was generally in fair to moderate agreement (Fleiss’ kappa 0.32 to 0.5), as shown in table 1. The agreement between the two readers from each hospital was in the same order of magnitude, with some exceptions. Table 1: Kappa values across hospitals (overall) and readers at respective hospital Image quality aspect Overall Hospital 1 Hospital 2 Hospital 3 FOV North 0.46 0.57 0.42 0.21 FOV East 0.5 0.48 0.27 0.49 FOV West 0.43 0.36 0.17 0.47 FOV...

Even though image quality criteria are stated in guidelines, image quality is perceived differently by readers. The differences in assessedpositioning quality are not only detected in observers from different institutions, but also among those from the same hospital. This is especially true for rotation, but also for the collimation perceived as too wide, which is also related to patient dose. When applying the described rating of positioning quality to establish thresholds for an automated image assessment [8], consensus of clinical staff on the image quality...

M. Englmaier; Munich/DE - nothing to disclose N. Wieberneit; Hamburg/DE - Employee at Philips Medical Systems DMC GmbH D. Sasse; Munich/DE - nothing to disclose H. J. Lamb; Leiden/NL - nothing to disclose M. Kotnik; Leiden/NL - nothing to disclose L. Lin; Leiden/NL - nothing to disclose J. Conradsen; Herning/DK - nothing to disclose J. Fløtten; Herning/DK - nothing to disclose D. Pfeiffer; Munich/DE - nothing to disclose

[1] K. Piper et al.: Chest reporting by radiographers: findings of an accredited postgraduate programme. Radiography 20 (2014), 94–99. [2] A.L.P. Moura et al., Image quality assessment in Chest radiography, Poster C-2793 ECR 2018 [3]S. Cândido et al., Image Quality Control in Digital Radiology, American Journal of Biomedical Engineering 3(6A) (2013), 8-14. [4] S. Mc Fadden et al., The impact of Digital Radiography: is it deskilling our radiographers? Poster C2285, ECR 2018 [5]J.S. Whaley J.S. et al., Investigation of the variability in the assessment of...