Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Penelitian ini dilakukan untuk menentukan faktor risiko yang berpengaruh terhadap kejadian eye strain pada dokter radiolog seperti jumlah interpretasi radiologis metode interpretasi radiologis PACS atau foto polos usia kelainan refraksi cara kerja dan desain perangkat kerja terhadap timbulnya eye strain Data dikumpulkan dengan cara anamnesis mengenai identitas umum pemeriksaan ketajaman penglihatan dengan Snellen chart dan penilaian derajat nyeri di sekitar mata menggunakan visual analoq scale yang dilakukan oleh peneliti dengan sebelumnya berkonsultasi dengan dokter spesialis mata Pemeriksaan ketajaman penglihatan dilakukan oleh peneliti menggunakan kartu Snellen pada jarak 6 meter dengan pencahayaan yang optimal di ruang perpustakaan Departemen Radiologi RSCM Derajat nyeri di sekitar mata dinilai menggunakan visual analoq scale Pemeriksaan tersebut dilakukan sebelum melakukan aktivitas dan 6 jam setelahnya Data dianalisis menggunakan SPSS versi 11 5 untuk analisis univariat menghitung risiko relatif dan analisis multivariat Penelitian ini telah lulus kaji etik oleh Komite Etik FKUI RSCM No 419 H2 F1 Etik 2014 Didapatkan sebanyak 9 68 dari 62 responden mengalami eye strain Rentang usia 27 37 tahun Faktor risiko yang memiliki hubungan yang bermakna dengan eye strain yaitu residen radiologi p 0 034 jumlah interpretasi radiologis lebih dari 50 buah dalam sehari p 0 001 dan lama kerja p 0 167 Faktor risiko yang memiliki hubungan yang paling bermakna dengan eye strain setelah dilakukan analisis multivariat hanya jumlah interpretasi radiologis lebih dari 50 buah dalam sehari Dari analisis hubungan antara beberapa faktor risiko yang disebutkan di atas dengan eye strain disimpulkan bahwa hanya jumlah interpretasi radiologis dalam sehari yang merupakan faktor risiko yang signifikan untuk eye strain Kata kunci dokter radiologi eye strain jumlah interpretasi radiologis.

---

Eye strain has a big influence in medical services including radiology examination Accuration of radiology interpretation will decrease if radiologist has eye strain To determine risk factors contributing to eye strain among radiologists we examined the influence of the case volume viewing method Picture Archiving and Communication System PACS and hard copy film age refractive abnormalities work habits and workstation design on eye strain Data were collected by work and disesase s history and examination of visual acuity with Snellen eye chart and assessment of the degree of pain in eyes using visual analog scale by researcher who has been trained by ophthalmologist The questionnaire has been informed by researcher before being filled by respondents Vision objective examination was conducted by researcher using the Snellen chart in a distance of 6 meters with optimal lighting in the library room of Radiology Department RSCM The degree of pain around the eyes was assessed using visual analog scale Respondents was asked by researcher about the pain arises around the eyes in a scale of 0 to 10 then the results were plotted on a visual analog scale ruler with the same scale of 0 to 10 The assesments were done before doing the activity and 6 hours after Data was analyzed using SPSS version 11 5 for univariat relative risk and multivariate analysis This study has been approved by Ethical Committe FKUI RSCM no 419 H2 F1 ETIK 2014 The adjusted response rate was 9 68 62 respondents The range of age was 27 37 years old Significant risk factors to eye strain were radiologists p 0 034 had case volume more than 50 pcs in a day p 0 005 and working hours p 0 167 for interpreting radiologic images Significant risk factor to eye strain by using multivariate analysis only case volume more than 50 pcs in a day Eye strain was common among the radiologists in our study population From the analysis of the relationship between some of the risk factors mentioned above with eye strain it was concluded that only the number of case volume in a day was significant risk factor to eey strain Keywords eye strain radiologist case volume."

"Latar BelakangPemeriksaan mamografi dan interpretasinya merupakan bagian dari kompetensi dokter spesialis radiologi umum. Keterbatasan jumlah tenaga kerja kesehatan, beban kerja tinggi, dan kondisi lingkungan yang tidak memadai dapat memengaruhi hasil interpretasi mamogram. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis kesesuaian diagnosis antara dokter spesialis radiologi Divisi Radiologi PRP dengan Non-Divisi Radiologi PRP.MetodePenelitian ini dilakukan retrospektif menggunakan data sekunder dari PACS di IPRKN Rumah Sakit Cipto Mangunkusumo (RSCM) pada tahun 2021. Data yang diambil ialah nomor rekam medis, usia, densitas, dan kategori Bi-RAD pada payudara kanan serta kiri berdasarkan mamogram. Data disajikan untuk melihat perbedaan diagnosis berdasarkan analisis expertise dokter spesialis radiologis Divisi Radiologi PRP dengan expertise dokter spesialis radiologis Non-Divisi Radiologi PRP.HasilDari 299 subjek penelitian yang memenuhi kriteria inklusi, diperoleh perbedaan bermakna antara hasil diagnosis radiologis payudara kanan dan kiri oleh dokter spesialis radiologi Non-Divisi Radiologi PRP dan Divisi Radiologi PRP (p = 0,001), dan tidak ditemukan hubungan bermakna berdasarkan usia (p = 0,600) dan densitas payudara (p = 0,378) pada diagnosis radiologi antara kedua divisi.KesimpulanTidak diperoleh kesesuaian antara diagnosis mamogram di payudara kanan dan kiri pada dokter spesialis radiologi Divisi Radiologi PRP serta Non-Divisi Radiologi PRP. Lalu, tidak didapatkan kesesuaian berdasarkan usia dan densitas payudara pada kedua diagnosis mamogram tersebut. Dibutuhkan penelitian lebih lanjut menggunakan baku emas histopatologis untuk menilai variabel yang memengaruhi kesesuaian diagnosis mamogram pada kelompok Divisi Radiologi PRP dan Non-Divisi Radiologi PRP.

---

Introduction

Screening and diagnostic mammograms are a part of both the competency of general radiologists in the non-breast and women’s reproductive division as well as breast radiologists in the breast and women’s reproductive division. However, due to the limited number of healthcare workers, workload, and inadequate environmental conditions, these factors can affect the interpretation of mamograms.

Method

This study is conducted retrospectively by reviewing secondary data from patient’s PACS at IPRKN Rumah Sakit Cipto Mangunkusumo (RSCM) in 2021. The data collected includes medical record numbers, patient’s age, breast density, and Bi-RAD categories for both right and left breast mammograms. The data were presented to observe the difference in analysis of the expertise of both general radiologists in non-breast and women’s reproductive division and as breast radiologists in the breast and women’s reproductive division.

Results

Out of the 299 subjects who met the inclusion criteria, a significant difference was found between the diagnostic interpretation for both the right and left breast by general radiologists in non-breast and women’s reproductive division and the breast radiologists in the breast and women’s reproductive division (p = 0.001). There was no significant association between the age (p = 0,600) and breast density (p = 0,378) in the radiological diagnosis between the two divisions.

Conclusion

There was no concordance found between mammograms diagnoses for both the right and left breast between general radiologists from the non-breast and women’s reproductive division and breast radiologists from the breast and women’s reproductive division. Furthermore, there was no concordance between mammogram interpretation based on age and breast density in both general and specialist radiologists. Further research using histopathological tests as the gold standard is needed to understand the factors that influence the concordance of mammogram diagnoses in both divisions."

"Latar BelakangPemeriksaan mamografi dan interpretasinya merupakan bagian dari kompetensi dokter spesialis radiologi umum. Keterbatasan jumlah tenaga kerja kesehatan, beban kerja tinggi, dan kondisi lingkungan yang tidak memadai dapat memengaruhi hasil interpretasi mamogram. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis kesesuaian diagnosis antara dokter spesialis radiologi Divisi Radiologi PRP dengan Non-Divisi Radiologi PRP.MetodePenelitian ini dilakukan retrospektif menggunakan data sekunder dari PACS di IPRKN Rumah Sakit Cipto Mangunkusumo (RSCM) pada tahun 2021. Data yang diambil ialah nomor rekam medis, usia, densitas, dan kategori Bi-RAD pada payudara kanan serta kiri berdasarkan mamogram. Data disajikan untuk melihat perbedaan diagnosis berdasarkan analisis expertise dokter spesialis radiologis Divisi Radiologi PRP dengan expertise dokter spesialis radiologis Non-Divisi Radiologi PRP.HasilDari 299 subjek penelitian yang memenuhi kriteria inklusi, diperoleh perbedaan bermakna antara hasil diagnosis radiologis payudara kanan dan kiri oleh dokter spesialis radiologi Non-Divisi Radiologi PRP dan Divisi Radiologi PRP (p = 0,001), dan tidak ditemukan hubungan bermakna berdasarkan usia (p = 0,600) dan densitas payudara (p = 0,378) pada diagnosis radiologi antara kedua divisi.KesimpulanTidak diperoleh kesesuaian antara diagnosis mamogram di payudara kanan dan kiri pada dokter spesialis radiologi Divisi Radiologi PRP serta Non-Divisi Radiologi PRP. Lalu, tidak didapatkan kesesuaian berdasarkan usia dan densitas payudara pada kedua diagnosis mamogram tersebut. Dibutuhkan penelitian lebih lanjut menggunakan baku emas histopatologis untuk menilai variabel yang memengaruhi kesesuaian diagnosis mamogram pada kelompok Divisi Radiologi PRP dan Non-Divisi Radiologi PRP.

---

Introduction

Screening and diagnostic mammograms are a part of both the competency of general radiologists in the non-breast and women’s reproductive division as well as breast radiologists in the breast and women’s reproductive division. However, due to the limited number of healthcare workers, workload, and inadequate environmental conditions, these factors can affect the interpretation of mamograms.

Method

This study is conducted retrospectively by reviewing secondary data from patient’s PACS at IPRKN Rumah Sakit Cipto Mangunkusumo (RSCM) in 2021. The data collected includes medical record numbers, patient’s age, breast density, and Bi-RAD categories for both right and left breast mammograms. The data were presented to observe the difference in analysis of the expertise of both general radiologists in non-breast and women’s reproductive division and as breast radiologists in the breast and women’s reproductive division.

Results

Out of the 299 subjects who met the inclusion criteria, a significant difference was found between the diagnostic interpretation for both the right and left breast by general radiologists in non-breast and women’s reproductive division and the breast radiologists in the breast and women’s reproductive division (p = 0.001). There was no significant association between the age (p = 0,600) and breast density (p = 0,378) in the radiological diagnosis between the two divisions.

Conclusion

There was no concordance found between mammograms diagnoses for both the right and left breast between general radiologists from the non-breast and women’s reproductive division and breast radiologists from the breast and women’s reproductive division. Furthermore, there was no concordance between mammogram interpretation based on age and breast density in both general and specialist radiologists. Further research using histopathological tests as the gold standard is needed to understand the factors that influence the concordance of mammogram diagnoses in both divisions."