Literature DB >> 23053163

Recommendations for additional imaging on emergency department CT examinations: comparison of emergency- and organ-based subspecialty radiologists.

Andrew B Rosenkrantz1, Brent W Matza, Mark P Foran, John M McMenamy.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Past studies have identified a high frequency of recommendations for additional imaging (RAI) for computed tomography (CT) studies performed in an emergency department (ED), thereby potentially contributing to increased imaging utilization and costs. The purpose of this study was to compare rates of RAI within the ED setting between ED-based and organ-based subspecialty radiologists.
METHODS: We identified 600 ED CT studies, comprising 200 head, chest, and abdominal CT studies, split equally between cases reviewed by ED-based and organ-based radiologists. Frequency of RAI for the three examinations was compared between these subspecialty groups.
RESULTS: Frequencies of RAI were 21.5 %, 13.5 %, and 5.5 % for CT examinations of the chest, abdomen, and brain, respectively. There was a significantly higher frequency of RAI for chest CT studies interpreted by chest radiologists than by ED radiologists (28.0 % vs. 15.0 %, respectively, p = 0.036), largely due to a higher rate of RAI for incidentally detected lung nodules and masses as well as other pulmonary parenchymal abnormalities by chest radiologists. There was no significant difference in RAI on brain or abdominal CT studies between the two groups (p = 0.426-1.0). However, on abdominal studies, only ED-based radiologists provided RAI for abnormalities of the bowel or uterus, while only organ-based radiologists provided RAI for pancreatic abnormalities. Only 25.6 % of RAI were subsequently performed at our institution.
CONCLUSION: For chest CT studies performed at the authors' institution, differences in management of incidental pulmonary nodules contributed to a significantly higher frequency of RAI by chest radiologists than by ED-based radiologists. Further investigation of the impact of these differences on cost and patient outcomes is warranted.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23053163     DOI: 10.1007/s10140-012-1079-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Emerg Radiol        ISSN: 1070-3004


  11 in total

1.  When does a radiologist's recommendation for follow-up result in high-cost imaging?

Authors:  Susanna I Lee; Arun Krishnaraj; Manjil Chatterji; Keith J Dreyer; James H Thrall; Peter F Hahn
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-11-14       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 2.  Management of an incidentally discovered pulmonary nodule.

Authors:  Catherine Beigelman-Aubry; Catherine Hill; Philippe A Grenier
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-10-05       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Quality review: Fleischner criteria adherence by radiologists in a large community hospital.

Authors:  Mark Masciocchi; Brent Wagner; Benjamin Lloyd
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 5.532

4.  Whole-body CT screening: spectrum of findings and recommendations in 1192 patients.

Authors:  Claudia D Furtado; Diego A Aguirre; Claude B Sirlin; David Dang; Stephan K Stamato; Patrick Lee; Farhad Sani; Michelle A Brown; David L Levin; Giovanna Casola
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-09-16       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Managing incidental findings on abdominal CT: white paper of the ACR incidental findings committee.

Authors:  Lincoln L Berland; Stuart G Silverman; Richard M Gore; William W Mayo-Smith; Alec J Megibow; Judy Yee; James A Brink; Mark E Baker; Michael P Federle; W Dennis Foley; Isaac R Francis; Brian R Herts; Gary M Israel; Glenn Krinsky; Joel F Platt; William P Shuman; Andrew J Taylor
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 5.532

6.  The prevalence of incidental findings on abdominal computed tomography scans of trauma patients.

Authors:  Akpofure Peter Ekeh; Mbaga Walusimbi; Erin Brigham; Randy J Woods; Mary C McCarthy
Journal:  J Emerg Med       Date:  2009-02-20       Impact factor: 1.484

7.  Frequency of radiology self-referral in abdominal computed tomographic scans and the implied cost.

Authors:  Michael Blaivas; Matthew Lyon
Journal:  Am J Emerg Med       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 2.469

8.  Recommendations for additional imaging in radiology reports: multifactorial analysis of 5.9 million examinations.

Authors:  Christopher L Sistrom; Keith J Dreyer; Pragya P Dang; Jeffrey B Weilburg; Giles W Boland; Daniel I Rosenthal; James H Thrall
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-08-25       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Intestinal obstruction: trends in imaging utilization and their influence in its rising hospital bill.

Authors:  Hansel J Otero; Sukru M Erturk; Roberto E Ochoa; Silvia Ondategui-Parra; Frank J Rybicki; Pablo R Ros
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2008-04-22

10.  Imaging utilization in the management of appendicitis and its impact on hospital charges.

Authors:  Hansel J Otero; Silvia Ondategui-Parra; Sukru Mehmet Erturk; Roberto E Ochoa; Aldo Gonzalez-Beicos; Pablo R Ros
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2007-10-31
View more
  1 in total

1.  Incidental findings in emergency imaging: frequency, recommendations, and compliance with consensus guidelines.

Authors:  Tarek N Hanna; Haris Shekhani; Matthew E Zygmont; James Matthew Kerchberger; Jamlik-Omari Johnson
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2016-02-03
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.