First reported 10 Dec 2019•Latest report 31 Mar 2026
Definition
What this concern includes
Includes failures in outsourced or other out-of-hours radiological reporting processes, including inaccurate or poor-quality reports, missed clinically significant findings and inadequate reporting controls that affect the reliability of interpretation provided to treating clinicians.
Not included
Excludes general radiology interpretation failures where the out-of-hours reporting context is not material.
Excludes radiology referral, report-transmission, follow-up or action failures where the report itself was accurate and the deficient control is downstream communication or clinical response.
Excludes delays or capacity shortages in imaging acquisition where the radiological reporting process is not deficient.
* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.
Most frequent recipients
Most frequent recipients
Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.
County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust1
Department of Health and Social Care1
Mid Yorkshire Teaching NHS Trust1
NHS England1
Royal College of Radiologists1
Stockport NHS Foundation Trust1
Tameside and Glossop Integrated Care NHS Foundation Trust1
Telemedicine Clinic Limited1
University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust1
NHS trust5
Executive non-departmental public body1
Health professional body1
Ministerial department1
Private limited company1
Concerns and responses across reports
Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.
West Yorkshire Western
Concerns raised1
Lack of paediatric radiology expertise in out-of-hours imaging interpretation
This report raised 4 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.10
Action
Reinforce clinician-to-radiologist communication processes for complex cases and maintain audit and peer review of radiology reports.
Stated by Mid Yorkshire Teaching NHS TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 7 April 2026.
Action
Roster a senior radiologist on every emergency shift for immediate peer consultation, second opinions, clinical discussion, and escalation support.
Stated by Telemedicine Clinic LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 7 April 2026.
Action
Encourage structured standard reports for CT head examinations to support systematic assessment of key infant imaging features.
Stated by Telemedicine Clinic LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 7 April 2026.
Action
Conduct retrospective senior-consultant second readings of all paediatric CT examinations within the same shift and monitor capacity constraints.
Stated by Telemedicine Clinic LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 7 April 2026.
Action
Provide prospective double reading for all paediatric CT scans involving children aged 0–5 years.
Stated by Telemedicine Clinic LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 7 April 2026.
Action
Share governance learning within the Emergency Radiology service on infant CT limitations and explicit escalation advice.
Stated by Telemedicine Clinic LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 7 April 2026.
Action
Increase prospective second reading for high-risk paediatric CT brain examinations, particularly for specified under-five neurological, infection, or safeguarding presentations.
Stated by Telemedicine Clinic LimitedStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 7 April 2026.
Action
Engage the client about service needs and discuss whether introducing or expanding prospective double reading would benefit its service.
Stated by Telemedicine Clinic LimitedStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 7 April 2026.
Action
Formally recognise scope-of-practice limitations and encourage radiologists to state when subspecialist review or further imaging is recommended.
Stated by Telemedicine Clinic LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 7 April 2026.
Action
Review the effectiveness of second-reading processes and escalation pathways during 2026 and report findings through clinical governance.
Stated by Telemedicine Clinic LimitedStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 7 April 2026.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
Position
Routine overnight access to subspecialist paediatric radiology reporting is unavailable within West Yorkshire.
Stated by Mid Yorkshire Teaching NHS TrustUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Position
General consultant radiologists supported by governance and escalation safeguards are considered appropriate; complete elimination of paediatric imaging risk is not expected.
Stated by Telemedicine Clinic LimitedExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
Manchester South
Concerns raised1
Failure to identify relevant findings in out-of-hours CT scan reports
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
Action
Continue engaging in REALM meetings to review complex cases and promote diagnostic excellence.
Stated by Stockport NHS Foundation TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 13 August 2025.
Action
Maintain an incident review and escalation framework for radiology discrepancies, including those involving external providers.
Stated by Stockport NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 13 August 2025.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.3
Position
The claim that Medica scan errors had occurred previously may reflect subjective observation, not a comprehensive assessment of reporting standards.
Stated by Stockport NHS Foundation TrustDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Position
Existing contractual controls, audits, governance, escalation, and acceptable accuracy thresholds are considered sufficient; no outstanding reporting concerns remain.
Stated by Stockport NHS Foundation TrustExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
Position
Medica retains responsibility for its radiology reports; further concerns about their content or conclusions should be directed to Medica.
Stated by Stockport NHS Foundation TrustRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.
County Durham and Darlington
Concerns raised1
Inadequate quality and accuracy of outsourced out-of-hours radiological reporting
This report raised 5 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statements
No respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
Manchester South
Concerns raised1
Delays in carrying out and reporting CT scans due to insufficient suitably qualified radiology staff
This report raised 3 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
Position
NHSE and local integrated care bodies are responsible for addressing the concerns about treatment at Wythenshawe Hospital.
Stated by Department of Health and Social CareRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.
Position
Greater Manchester Integrated Care provides the relevant services, while its Integrated Care Board decides commissioned health services.
Stated by NHS EnglandRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.
Manchester South
Concerns raised1
Insufficient equipment for urgent out-of-hours imaging reporting from home
This report raised 3 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
Action
Revisit radiology informatics guidance to verify that imaging equipment specifications are clear and unambiguous.
Stated by Royal College of RadiologistsStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 21 October 2020.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
Position
Local clinical governance protocols are responsible for ensuring imaging reports use equipment meeting minimum clinical requirements.
Stated by Royal College of RadiologistsRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.
Position
Publicly available guidelines already set minimum equipment requirements for reviewing and reporting imaging investigations on and off site.
Stated by Royal College of RadiologistsExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
Brighton and Hove
Concerns raised1
Failure to identify mesenteric thrombi in overnight radiology practice
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.5
Action
Remind radiologists and trainees to specifically assess the superior mesenteric artery when investigating suspected ischaemic bowel.
Stated by University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 30 December 2019.
Action
Change radiology protocols to use thinner two-plane reconstructions for improved regional visualisation.
Stated by University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 30 December 2019.
Action
Require next-morning Consultant review of overnight scans reported by pre-FRCR Part 2b trainees.
Stated by University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 30 December 2019.
Action
Enable discretionary next-morning Consultant review of scans reported overnight by post-FRCR Part 2b trainees.
Stated by University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 30 December 2019.
Action
Re-present the case through the REAL radiology learning and case-review meeting.
Stated by University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 30 December 2019.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
Position
The missed embolus was difficult to diagnose, perception errors can occur, and no particular reporting pressure, interruption or distraction was identified.
Stated by University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation TrustDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Pin
Get email alerts
Request correction
Includes failures in outsourced or other out-of-hours radiological reporting processes, including inaccurate or poor-quality reports, missed clinically significant findings and inadequate reporting controls that affect the reliability of interpretation provided to treating clinicians.
