Literature DB >> 23491153

Radiology stewardship and quality improvement: the process and costs of implementing a CT radiation dose optimization committee in a medium-sized community hospital system.

Jenifer R Q W Siegelman1, Dustin A Gress.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aims of this study were to measure the effectiveness of a multidisciplinary CT dose optimization committee and estimate its costs and to describe a radiation stewardship quality improvement initiative in one CT department at a medium-sized community hospital system that used a participatory design committee methodology.
METHODS: A CT dose optimization committee was conceived, funded, and formed, consisting of the following stakeholders: radiologists, technologists, consultant medical physicists, and an administrator. Volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and repeat rate were monitored for 1 month, for one scan type, during which iterative protocol adjustments were made through committee interaction. Effects on repeat rate and CTDIvol were quantified and benchmarked against national diagnostic reference levels after retrospective medical record review of 100 consecutive patients before and after the intervention. Labor hours were reported and wage resources estimated.
RESULTS: Over 3 months, the committee met in person twice and exchanged 128 e-mails in establishing a process for protocol improvement and measurement of success. Repeat rate was reduced from 13% (13 of 100) to 0% (0 of 100). Scans meeting the ACR reference level for CTDIvol (75 mGy) improved by 34% (38 of 100 before, 51 of 100 after; Fisher's exact 2-tailed P = .09), and those meeting ACR pass/fail criterion (80 mGy) improved by 29% (58 of 100 before, 75 of 100 after; Fisher's exact 2-tailed P = .01). Committee evolution and work, and protocol development and implementation, required 57 person-hours, at an estimated labor cost of $12,488.
CONCLUSIONS: An efficient process was established as a proof of concept for the use of a multidisciplinary committee to reduce patient radiation dose, repeat rate, and variability in image quality. The committee and process ultimately improved the quality of patient care, fostered a culture of safety and ongoing quality improvement, and calculated costs for such an endeavor.
Copyright © 2013 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23491153     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2012.12.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol        ISSN: 1546-1440            Impact factor:   5.532


  11 in total

1.  Implementation of a computed tomography dose management program across a multinational healthcare organization.

Authors:  Katia Katsari; Hugo Pasquier; Milan Barati; Pilar Pujadas; Rowland O Illing
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2021-05-18       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Opportunities to Reduce CT Radiation Exposure, Experience Over 5 Years at the NIH Clinical Center.

Authors:  William C Kovacs; Jianhua Yao; David A Bluemke; Les R Folio
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 0.972

3.  From Information Management to Information Visualization: Development of Radiology Dashboards.

Authors:  Mahtab Karami; Reza Safdari
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2016-05-11       Impact factor: 2.342

4.  Optimizing Radiation Doses for Computed Tomography Across Institutions: Dose Auditing and Best Practices.

Authors:  Joshua Demb; Philip Chu; Thomas Nelson; David Hall; Anthony Seibert; Ramit Lamba; John Boone; Mayil Krishnam; Christopher Cagnon; Maryam Bostani; Robert Gould; Diana Miglioretti; Rebecca Smith-Bindman
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 21.873

5.  Strategies for Dose Optimization: Views From Health Care Systems.

Authors:  Robin R Whitebird; Leif I Solberg; Philip W Chu; Rebecca Smith-Bindman
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 6.240

Review 6.  Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography for primary care providers.

Authors:  Thomas B Richards; Mary C White; Ralph S Caraballo
Journal:  Prim Care       Date:  2014-03-26       Impact factor: 2.907

7.  AAPM medical physics practice guideline 6.a.: Performance characteristics of radiation dose index monitoring systems.

Authors:  Dustin A Gress; Renee L Dickinson; William D Erwin; David W Jordan; Robert J Kobistek; Donna M Stevens; Mark P Supanich; Jia Wang; Lynne A Fairobent
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2017-05-12       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  Compliance with AAPM Practice Guideline 1.a: CT Protocol Management and Review - from the perspective of a university hospital.

Authors:  Timothy P Szczykutowicz; Robert K Bour; Myron Pozniak; Frank N Ranallo
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2015-03-08       Impact factor: 2.102

9.  Improving service uptake and quality of care of integrated maternal health services: the Kenya Kwale District improvement collaborative.

Authors:  Michael K Mwaniki; Sonali Vaid; Isaac Mwamuye Chome; Dorcas Amolo; Youssef Tawfik
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-09-21       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  AAPM medical physics practice guideline 1.a: CT protocol management and review practice guideline.

Authors:  Dianna D Cody; Tyler S Fisher; Dustin A Gress; Rick Robert Layman; Michael F McNitt-Gray; Robert J Pizzutiello; Lynne A Fairobent
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2013-09-06       Impact factor: 2.102

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.