Following minor ankle injuries, do accompanying foot projections add diagnostic value to an AP an...

1. 1. In cases where ipsilateral foot and ankle x-rays were ordered, the foot was not justified

1.1. vague referral orders

1.2. ?base of fifth fracture

1.3. may be cancelled by radiographer

1.4. if justified should not be included?

1.5. radiographers ask the patient but don't record on RISPACs, so may be justified

1.6. type of injury

2. High number of fracture negative radiographs due to ipsilateral foot x-rays after acute ankle injuries

2.1. Ottawa Ankle Rules

2.2. Type of ankle injury

2.3. Patients unable to localise pain

2.4. Doctors unable to localise pain

2.5. Doctors dont trust Ottawa rules

2.6. extra costs, dose, time

2.7. base of fifth fracture

3. Variables

3.1. Time of year

3.2. age

3.3. type of injury

3.4. radiographer

3.5. Use of the ottawa rules?

3.6. referring clinician - vague or not

3.7. gender

3.8. time of day/night

4. Data collection

4.1. retrospective

4.2. quantitative

4.3. anonymous

4.4. time consuming

4.5. variables depending

4.6. enough population?

5. 2. In cases where foot and ankle x-rays were performed, the ankle projections alone contained all of the necessary information for the diagnosis of the injuries present.

5.1. depends on Radiographer technique

5.2. depends on fracture type

5.3. additional info is always helpful

5.4. ALARA

6. 3. In cases where there is a fracture at the base of the fifth metatarsal present, the DP or Oblique foot radiographs are needed to view the extent of the fracture.

6.1. Should be ordered after initial ankle

6.2. Protocol to include either DP or Oblique if suspected fracture

6.3. need radiologist?

6.4. 2 radiographs needed always

7. RISPACs

7.1. Vague referrals

7.2. Filters

7.3. doesn't contain all of the information - HIS

7.4. random selesction

7.5. 10 per month?

7.6. what if none have fractures

7.7. retrospective