Kanako K Kumamaru1, Sadayuki Murayama2, Yasuyuki Yamashita3, Takeshi Nojo4, Yoshiyuki Watanabe5, Mariko Goto6, Eriko Maeda7, Junko Echigo8, Shigeyoshi Soga9, Shinya Fujii10, Yutaka Tanami11, Tetsuhiko Okabe12, Masahiro Okada13, Jiro Munechika14, Hideki Ota15, Mototaka Miyake16, Hiroshi Honda17, Shigeki Aoki18. 1. Department of Radiology, Graduate School of Medicine, Juntendo University, 2-1-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8421, Japan. k-kumamaru@juntendo.ac.jp. 2. Department of Radiology, Graduate School of Medical Science, University of the Ryukyus, Okinawa, Japan. 3. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Faculty of Life Sciences, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan. 4. Department of Radiology, New Tokyo Hospital, Chiba, Japan. 5. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan. 6. Department of Radiology, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan. 7. Department of Radiology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. 8. Division of Quality and Patient Safety, Toranomon Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. 9. Department of Radiology, National Defense Medical College, Saitama, Japan. 10. Division of Radiology, Department of Pathophysiological and Therapeutic Science, Faculty of Medicine, Tottori University, Tottori, Japan. 11. Department of Radiology, Saitama Children's Medical Center, Saitama, Japan. 12. Department of Radiology, St. Luke's International Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. 13. Department of Radiology, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan. 14. Department of Radiology, Showa University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan. 15. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Tohoku University Hospital, Miyagi, Japan. 16. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. 17. Department of Clinical Radiology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan. 18. Department of Radiology, Graduate School of Medicine, Juntendo University, 2-1-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8421, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To survey whether imaging is being performed appropriately in Japan, and to survey whether radiologists intervene to ensure imaging requests are appropriate. METHODS: An online survey was sent to radiologists at accredited radiology training hospitals. The survey included the radiologists' perspectives on whether imaging is performed appropriately at their institutions and whether they intervene if the indication for imaging is inappropriate/ambiguous. RESULTS: The response rate was 87.3% (165/189). We observed marked variability in the frequencies that imaging not recommended by the guidelines was performed among modalities and/or body parts; the responses "very frequently/frequently performed" were more common for breast cancer related imaging examinations and for head CT/MRI. The respondents frequently reported that inappropriate/ambiguous indications included requests to expand the craniocaudal range or to perform whole-body imaging. In 80% of the hospitals (132/165), radiologists contacted the physicians who requested unrecommended examinations; the number of CT and MRI examinations that full-time radiologists need to interpret in a half-day session was significantly smaller at these hospitals (median 18 vs 24, P = 0.032). CONCLUSION: We conducted a survey to investigate appropriate imaging utilization in Japan. At the hospitals with numerous examinations to interpret, full-time radiologists may find it difficult to ensure that examinations are ordered appropriately.
PURPOSE: To survey whether imaging is being performed appropriately in Japan, and to survey whether radiologists intervene to ensure imaging requests are appropriate. METHODS: An online survey was sent to radiologists at accredited radiology training hospitals. The survey included the radiologists' perspectives on whether imaging is performed appropriately at their institutions and whether they intervene if the indication for imaging is inappropriate/ambiguous. RESULTS: The response rate was 87.3% (165/189). We observed marked variability in the frequencies that imaging not recommended by the guidelines was performed among modalities and/or body parts; the responses "very frequently/frequently performed" were more common for breast cancer related imaging examinations and for head CT/MRI. The respondents frequently reported that inappropriate/ambiguous indications included requests to expand the craniocaudal range or to perform whole-body imaging. In 80% of the hospitals (132/165), radiologists contacted the physicians who requested unrecommended examinations; the number of CT and MRI examinations that full-time radiologists need to interpret in a half-day session was significantly smaller at these hospitals (median 18 vs 24, P = 0.032). CONCLUSION: We conducted a survey to investigate appropriate imaging utilization in Japan. At the hospitals with numerous examinations to interpret, full-time radiologists may find it difficult to ensure that examinations are ordered appropriately.
Authors: Annette C Douglas; Franz J Wippold; Daniel F Broderick; Ashley H Aiken; Sepideh Amin-Hanjani; Douglas C Brown; Amanda S Corey; Isabelle M Germano; James A Hadley; Bharathi D Jagadeesan; Jennifer S Jurgens; Tabassum A Kennedy; Laszlo L Mechtler; Nandini D Patel; Gregory J Zipfel Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2014-06-03 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Nandini D Patel; Daniel F Broderick; Judah Burns; Tejaswini K Deshmukh; Ian Blair Fries; H Benjamin Harvey; Langston Holly; Christopher H Hunt; Bharathi D Jagadeesan; Tabassum A Kennedy; John E O'Toole; Joel S Perlmutter; Bruno Policeni; Joshua M Rosenow; Jason W Schroeder; Matthew T Whitehead; Rebecca S Cornelius; Amanda S Corey Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2016-08-03 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Kanako K Kumamaru; Hiraku Kumamaru; Brian T Bateman; Jessica Gronsbell; Tianxi Cai; Jun Liu; Laurence D Higgins; Shigeki Aoki; Kuni Ohtomo; Frank J Rybicki; Elisabetta Patorno Journal: Radiology Date: 2016-05-26 Impact factor: 11.105