<![CDATA[Radiology services require quality control to ensure the quality of diagnostic images. One of the indicators used is the reject rate. However, analyses of reject rates in Computed Radiography (CR) systems based on actual data and causative factors at healthcare facilities remain under-reported; consequently, information regarding patterns of reject incidents—which serves as a basis for service quality improvement—is limited. This gap indicates that radiographic quality control, particularly regarding Computed Radiography (CR) systems, requires contextual evaluation across various facilities. This study aims to analyze reject rates, causative factors, and efforts to reduce reject incidents at the Radiology Unit of RSGM Ambarawa. This is a descriptive study employing a quantitative approach supplemented by qualitative data. Primary data consisted of secondary data obtained from radiography reject logs, monthly film usage reports, and a summary of reject incidents at the RSGM Ambarawa Radiology Unit for the period of January–March 2026. Observations and interviews with three informants (the unit head and two radiographers) were conducted to enrich and verify the context, causative factors, and reject control measures. Analysis was performed by calculating reject rates using standard formulas and categorizing the causes of rejection. The results showed reject rates of 0.71% in January 2026 (18 CR rejects out of 2,530 films), 0.73% in February 2026 (17 CR rejects out of 2,338 films), and 1.01% in March 2026 (19 CR rejects out of 1,890 films). All values fell below the threshold of ≤2%. Factors contributing to image rejects included underexposure (20.75%), processing issues (20.75%), positioning errors (18.52%), motion artifacts (14.81%), overexposure (12.96%), and equipment-related issues (12.96%). Measures already implemented include briefings on exposure factor selection, improved patient communication, routine equipment maintenance, dual identity verification in accordance with Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), and supervision of student interns. Future recommendations include developing an SOP for window settings, procuring Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) units, and integrating the PACS system.]]>
