BACKGROUND: Computed tomography (CT) scans are used extensively to investigate chest disease because of their cross-sectional perspective and superior contrast resolution compared with chest radiographs. These advantages lead to a more accurate imaging assessment of thoracic disease. The actual use and evaluation of the clinical impact of thoracic CT has not been assessed since scanners became widely available. OBJECTIVE: To identify patterns of utilization, waiting times and the impact of CT scan results on clinical diagnoses. DESIGN: A before and after survey of physicians who had ordered thoracic CT scans. SETTING: Vancouver General Hospital--a tertiary care teaching centre in Vancouver, British Columbia. SUBJECTS: Physicians who had ordered CT scans. INTERVENTION: Physicians completed a standard questionnaire before and after the CT scan result was available. MEASUREMENTS: Changes in the clinical diagnosis, estimates of the probabilities for the diagnosis both before and after the CT scan, and waiting times. RESULTS: Four hundred fifty-four thoracic CT cases had completed questionnaires, of whom 80% were outpatients. A change in diagnosis was made in 48% of cases (25% with a normal CT scan and 23% with CT scan findings that indicated a different diagnosis). The largest change in probability scores for the clinical diagnosis before and after the CT scan was 43.9% for normal scans, while it was 36.3% for a different diagnosis and 26.3% for the same diagnosis. High-priority scans were associated with decreased waiting time (--7.89 days for each unit increase in priority). CONCLUSIONS: The CT scan results were associated with a change in diagnosis in 48% of cases. Normal scans constituted 25% of the total and had the greatest impact scores. Waiting times were highly correlated with increased urgency of the presenting problem.
BACKGROUND: Computed tomography (CT) scans are used extensively to investigate chest disease because of their cross-sectional perspective and superior contrast resolution compared with chest radiographs. These advantages lead to a more accurate imaging assessment of thoracic disease. The actual use and evaluation of the clinical impact of thoracic CT has not been assessed since scanners became widely available. OBJECTIVE: To identify patterns of utilization, waiting times and the impact of CT scan results on clinical diagnoses. DESIGN: A before and after survey of physicians who had ordered thoracic CT scans. SETTING: Vancouver General Hospital--a tertiary care teaching centre in Vancouver, British Columbia. SUBJECTS: Physicians who had ordered CT scans. INTERVENTION: Physicians completed a standard questionnaire before and after the CT scan result was available. MEASUREMENTS: Changes in the clinical diagnosis, estimates of the probabilities for the diagnosis both before and after the CT scan, and waiting times. RESULTS: Four hundred fifty-four thoracic CT cases had completed questionnaires, of whom 80% were outpatients. A change in diagnosis was made in 48% of cases (25% with a normal CT scan and 23% with CT scan findings that indicated a different diagnosis). The largest change in probability scores for the clinical diagnosis before and after the CT scan was 43.9% for normal scans, while it was 36.3% for a different diagnosis and 26.3% for the same diagnosis. High-priority scans were associated with decreased waiting time (--7.89 days for each unit increase in priority). CONCLUSIONS: The CT scan results were associated with a change in diagnosis in 48% of cases. Normal scans constituted 25% of the total and had the greatest impact scores. Waiting times were highly correlated with increased urgency of the presenting problem.
Authors: Chaan S Ng; Christopher J E Watson; Christopher R Palmer; Teik Choon See; Nigel A Beharry; Barbara A Housden; J Andrew Bradley; Adrian K Dixon Journal: BMJ Date: 2002-12-14
Authors: Annette M McWilliams; John R Mayo; Myeong Im Ahn; Sharyn L S MacDonald; Stephen C Lam Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Marco J L van Strijen; Wouter de Monyé; Jan Schiereck; Gerard J Kieft; Martin H Prins; Menno V Huisman; Peter M T Pattynama Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2003-02-18 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Annette McWilliams; John Mayo; Sharyn MacDonald; Jean C leRiche; Branko Palcic; Eva Szabo; Stephen Lam Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2003-07-25 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Gracijela Bozovic; Catharina Adlercreutz; Isabella M Björkman-Burtscher; Peter Reinstrup; Richard Ingemansson; Elin Skansebo; Mats Geijer Journal: Acta Radiol Open Date: 2018-06-14