Angel L Schuster1, Howard P Forman2,3, Paula D Strassle4, Laura T Meyer5,6, Scott V Connelly7,8, Christoph I Lee9,10,11. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Cape Fear Valley Medical Center, 1638 Owen Drive, Fayetteville, NC, 28304, USA. Angel.L.Schuster@gmail.com. 2. Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, CT, 06510, USA. 3. Department of Health Policy and Management, Yale School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, CT, 06510, USA. 4. Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 135 Dauer Drive, 2101 McGavran-Greenberg Hall, CB #7435, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA. 5. Department of Radiology, WakeMed Health and Hospitals, Raleigh Campus, 3000 New Bern Avenue, Raleigh, NC, 27610, USA. 6. Wake Radiology, 3949 Browning Place, Raleigh, NC, 27609, USA. 7. Department of Emergency Medicine, WakeMed Health and Hospitals, Raleigh Campus, 3000 New Bern Avenue, 3rd Floor MOB, Raleigh, NC, 27610, USA. 8. Wake Emergency Physicians, PA, 3000 New Bern Avenue, 3rd Floor MOB, Raleigh, NC, 27610, USA. 9. Department of Radiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, 825 Eastlake Avenue East, G3-200, Seattle, WA, 98109-1023, USA. 10. Department of Health Services, University of Washington School of Medicine, 825 Eastlake Avenue East, G3-200, Seattle, WA, 98109-1023, USA. 11. Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, 825 Eastlake Avenue East, G3-200, Seattle, WA, 98109-1023, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Using the study design from a prominent 2004 study, we aimed to reassess patient, provider, and radiologist awareness of CT radiation more than a decade later. METHODS: Adults presenting to the emergency department of a tertiary care center over a 2-week period with mild to moderate pain requiring an abdominopelvic CT scan were surveyed. Patients were asked if anyone had discussed the risks/benefits of the CT scan including radiation dose and were asked to estimate their dose compared to a chest X-ray. Emergency providers and radiologists were given similar surveys and were asked about potential obstacles to discussing CT radiation with patients. RESULTS: A total of 101 patients, 570 emergency providers, and 161 radiologists were surveyed. Twenty-three percent (14/61) of patients, 39% (219/568) of emergency providers, and 48% (77/161) of radiologists correctly selected the radiation dose range of an abdominopelvic CT. Seventy-eight percent (441/567) of emergency providers reported routinely discussing radiation dose with patients, while 20% (20/98) of patients reported that their emergency provider discussed radiation dose with them. Time limitation and concern of dissuading the patient from CT were the most commonly reported obstacles for discussing risks. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and providers in 2015 appear to be more aware of radiation dose from CT than they were in 2004. Discussion of CT scan radiation exposure and associated risks only occurs sometimes and may actually occur less frequently than perceived by emergency providers.
INTRODUCTION: Using the study design from a prominent 2004 study, we aimed to reassess patient, provider, and radiologist awareness of CT radiation more than a decade later. METHODS: Adults presenting to the emergency department of a tertiary care center over a 2-week period with mild to moderate pain requiring an abdominopelvic CT scan were surveyed. Patients were asked if anyone had discussed the risks/benefits of the CT scan including radiation dose and were asked to estimate their dose compared to a chest X-ray. Emergency providers and radiologists were given similar surveys and were asked about potential obstacles to discussing CT radiation with patients. RESULTS: A total of 101 patients, 570 emergency providers, and 161 radiologists were surveyed. Twenty-three percent (14/61) of patients, 39% (219/568) of emergency providers, and 48% (77/161) of radiologists correctly selected the radiation dose range of an abdominopelvic CT. Seventy-eight percent (441/567) of emergency providers reported routinely discussing radiation dose with patients, while 20% (20/98) of patients reported that their emergency provider discussed radiation dose with them. Time limitation and concern of dissuading the patient from CT were the most commonly reported obstacles for discussing risks. CONCLUSIONS:Patients and providers in 2015 appear to be more aware of radiation dose from CT than they were in 2004. Discussion of CT scan radiation exposure and associated risks only occurs sometimes and may actually occur less frequently than perceived by emergency providers.
Authors: Martha S Linet; Thomas L Slovis; Donald L Miller; Ruth Kleinerman; Choonsik Lee; Preetha Rajaraman; Amy Berrington de Gonzalez Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2012-02-03 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Brigitte M Baumann; Esther H Chen; Angela M Mills; Lindsey Glaspey; Nicole M Thompson; Molly K Jones; Michael C Farner Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2010-12-13 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Raymond H Thornton; Lawrence T Dauer; Elyse Shuk; Carma L Bylund; Smita C Banerjee; Erin Maloney; Lindsey B Fox; Christopher M Beattie; Hedvig Hricak; Jennifer Hay Journal: Radiology Date: 2015-03-24 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Thi Ninh Ha; Sviatlana Kamarova; David Youens; Cameron Wright; Donald McRobbie; Jenny Doust; John Slavotinek; Max K Bulsara; Rachael Moorin Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-06-01 Impact factor: 3.006