1/3
Looks like no tags are added yet.
Name | Mastery | Learn | Test | Matching | Spaced | Call with Kai | Chat |
|---|
No analytics yet
Send a link to your students to track their progress

1. This looks more like an AP projection of the metatarsals than it does of the foot.
2. Digits 2-4 are superimposing on one another and surrounding soft tissues are obstructing view of possible pathology findings. The head metatarsals 2-3 are also superimposing on one another. Instruct the patient to gently flatten out their foot parallel to the IR.
3. The CR is too high and was not properly collimated. The CR must be at the base of the 3rd metatarsal and the collimation size field should be opened up to at maximum 10x12 portrait. The sesamoid bones on digit 1 are superimposed on the 1st metatarsal head, which tells me that this image was exposed without tube angularity of either 5-15 degrees posteriorly, depending on the patient's foot arch. The technologist must fix this error by adjusting the tube angle to compensate for the patient's arch.
4. The technique can be improved as there is a lot of mottle in the image, which tells me this image is underexposed. However, there are no artifacts.
5. This image is not legal. There are no patient identifiers, facility number, anatomical markers, and technologist initials.

1. This is a lateral projection of the right foot with insufficient dorsiflexion.
2. The foot must be dorsiflexed so that the plantar surface is perpendicular to the IR. Due to this error, the 5th metatarsal base and sinus tarsi are no longer in medial profile. Positioning can be more comfortable if the patient was able to bend their knee at a 45 degree angle in order to sufficiently dorsiflex their foot. Instruct the patient to flex their knee and carefully rotate their foot more laterally against the IR.
3. The CR is more at the level of the cuneocuboid joint than it is of the medial cuneiform or the base of the 3rd metatarsal. The collimation is too open and should be closed in to the anatomy of interest, including only 1 inch proximal to the ankle joint.
4. The technique looks correct and there are no artifacts.
5. This image is not legal. There are no patient identifiers and facility number. However, the anatomical marker and the technologist's initials are included.
x
x