OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the justification of CT examinations performed on young patients can be improved by various interventions and whether these have an effect on the total number of CTs performed. METHODS: Specific interventions-education, guideline implementation and increased MRI capacity-were introduced at the Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland, following a previous study demonstrating unjustified use of CT examination in young patients. In the present study, the justification of 177 CT examinations of the lumbar and cervical spine, head, abdomen, nasal sinuses and trauma performed on patients aged under 35 years in 2009 was analysed retrospectively by looking at requests and corresponding patient files. The indications of the examinations were compared with the referral guidelines recommended by the European Commission. Results from our previously published similar study carried out before the interventions were used as a reference. RESULTS: The proportion of justified CT examinations increased from 71% (141/200) in 2005 to 87% (154/177) in 2009 (p<0.001), and in the lumbar spine group from 23% (7/30) to 81% (22/27) (p<0.001). In the case of most of the unjustified examinations, MRI could have been performed instead. The total number of CT examinations carried out on young patients decreased by 7% (p=0.012) and in the lumbar spine group by 79% (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: The implemented interventions decreased the number of CT examinations performed on young patients, and the justification of the examinations improved significantly. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This study demonstrates that it is possible to reduce the number of various CT examinations and to improve their justification in young patients by regular education, guideline implementation and increased MRI capacity.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the justification of CT examinations performed on young patients can be improved by various interventions and whether these have an effect on the total number of CTs performed. METHODS: Specific interventions-education, guideline implementation and increased MRI capacity-were introduced at the Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland, following a previous study demonstrating unjustified use of CT examination in young patients. In the present study, the justification of 177 CT examinations of the lumbar and cervical spine, head, abdomen, nasal sinuses and trauma performed on patients aged under 35 years in 2009 was analysed retrospectively by looking at requests and corresponding patient files. The indications of the examinations were compared with the referral guidelines recommended by the European Commission. Results from our previously published similar study carried out before the interventions were used as a reference. RESULTS: The proportion of justified CT examinations increased from 71% (141/200) in 2005 to 87% (154/177) in 2009 (p<0.001), and in the lumbar spine group from 23% (7/30) to 81% (22/27) (p<0.001). In the case of most of the unjustified examinations, MRI could have been performed instead. The total number of CT examinations carried out on young patients decreased by 7% (p=0.012) and in the lumbar spine group by 79% (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: The implemented interventions decreased the number of CT examinations performed on young patients, and the justification of the examinations improved significantly. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This study demonstrates that it is possible to reduce the number of various CT examinations and to improve their justification in young patients by regular education, guideline implementation and increased MRI capacity.
Authors: Ivan K Ip; Louise I Schneider; Richard Hanson; Dana Marchello; Patricia Hultman; Michael Viera; Brian Chiango; Katherine P Andriole; Andrew Menard; Susan Schade; Steven E Seltzer; Ramin Khorasani Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Vartan M Vartanians; Christopher L Sistrom; Jeffrey B Weilburg; Daniel I Rosenthal; James H Thrall Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: J Malone; R Guleria; C Craven; P Horton; H Järvinen; J Mayo; G O'reilly; E Picano; D Remedios; J Le Heron; M Rehani; O Holmberg; R Czarwinski Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2011-02-22 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Mark S Pearce; Jane A Salotti; Mark P Little; Kieran McHugh; Choonsik Lee; Kwang Pyo Kim; Nicola L Howe; Cecile M Ronckers; Preetha Rajaraman; Alan W Sir Craft; Louise Parker; Amy Berrington de González Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-06-07 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: John D Mathews; Anna V Forsythe; Zoe Brady; Martin W Butler; Stacy K Goergen; Graham B Byrnes; Graham G Giles; Anthony B Wallace; Philip R Anderson; Tenniel A Guiver; Paul McGale; Timothy M Cain; James G Dowty; Adrian C Bickerstaffe; Sarah C Darby Journal: BMJ Date: 2013-05-21
Authors: Fernando Ruiz Santiago; Antonio Jesús Láinez Ramos-Bossini; Yì Xiáng J Wáng; José Pablo Martínez Barbero; Jade García Espinosa; Alberto Martínez Martínez Journal: Quant Imaging Med Surg Date: 2022-07
Authors: Annelie Slaar; M M Fockens; Junfeng Wang; Mario Maas; David J Wilson; J Carel Goslings; Niels Wl Schep; Rick R van Rijn Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-12-07