Jason Seidel1, Mary Beth Bissell2, Sannihita Vatturi2, Angus Hartery2. 1. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Memorial University, St John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. Electronic address: Jason.scott.s@gmail.com. 2. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Memorial University, St John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To explore resource utilization through evaluation of computed tomography (CT) imaging trends in the emergency department by examining common indications/outcomes for imaging in this setting. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of clinical indications/outcomes for all CT imaging in 3 emergency departments over a 1-year period was conducted. Scans were divided by body part and the most common indications for each type of scan were determined. Clinical outcomes from each study were extracted from final interpretations by the reporting radiologist. RESULTS: A total of 4556 CT scans were performed in the emergency department over a 1-year period. A total of 3.6% of all-comers to our emergency departments underwent CT scan as part of their investigation. There were 2107 head CTs (46%), 1296 (28%) abdominal CTs, 468 (10%) CTs of the chest, 408 (9%) CTs of the neck/spine, and 101 (2%) extremity CTs performed. The most common clinical indication for performing a CT head was focal neurological defect comprising 1534 (73%) of all CT heads. Twenty-four percent of abdominal CTs were for investigation of right lower quadrant pain, followed by flank pain (19%). Chest pain and shortness of breath were the most common indications for CTs of the chest (315 [75%]) with 10% of these examinations for this indication positive for pulmonary embolism. Trauma was the most common indication for neck CTs (296 [73%]) and extremities (70 [69%]). Nil acute was the most common final interpretation in all categories (79% CT heads, 75% neck CTs, 38% abdominal CTs, 43% chest CTs). CONCLUSIONS: Nil acute was the most common diagnosis; however, serious clinical outcomes were identified 40% of the time. Cross-sectional imaging remains an integral tool for triage and diagnosis in this environment as the cost of missing a diagnosis in this setting has a great impact on patient care.
PURPOSE: To explore resource utilization through evaluation of computed tomography (CT) imaging trends in the emergency department by examining common indications/outcomes for imaging in this setting. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of clinical indications/outcomes for all CT imaging in 3 emergency departments over a 1-year period was conducted. Scans were divided by body part and the most common indications for each type of scan were determined. Clinical outcomes from each study were extracted from final interpretations by the reporting radiologist. RESULTS: A total of 4556 CT scans were performed in the emergency department over a 1-year period. A total of 3.6% of all-comers to our emergency departments underwent CT scan as part of their investigation. There were 2107 head CTs (46%), 1296 (28%) abdominal CTs, 468 (10%) CTs of the chest, 408 (9%) CTs of the neck/spine, and 101 (2%) extremity CTs performed. The most common clinical indication for performing a CT head was focal neurological defect comprising 1534 (73%) of all CT heads. Twenty-four percent of abdominal CTs were for investigation of right lower quadrant pain, followed by flank pain (19%). Chest pain and shortness of breath were the most common indications for CTs of the chest (315 [75%]) with 10% of these examinations for this indication positive for pulmonary embolism. Trauma was the most common indication for neck CTs (296 [73%]) and extremities (70 [69%]). Nil acute was the most common final interpretation in all categories (79% CT heads, 75% neck CTs, 38% abdominal CTs, 43% chest CTs). CONCLUSIONS: Nil acute was the most common diagnosis; however, serious clinical outcomes were identified 40% of the time. Cross-sectional imaging remains an integral tool for triage and diagnosis in this environment as the cost of missing a diagnosis in this setting has a great impact on patient care.
Authors: C Garlisi; D Licandro; A Siani; S Rodolfi; S Pansini; L I Garcia Navarro; A Carriero; G C Avanzi; L M Castello Journal: Emerg Radiol Date: 2021-04-04
Authors: Kristina Miger; Andreas Fabricius-Bjerre; Anne Sophie Overgaard Olesen; Ahmad Sajadieh; Nis Høst; Nanna Køber; Annemette Abild; Mathilde Marie Winkler Wille; Jesper Wamberg; Lars Pedersen; Hans Henrik Lawaetz Schultz; Christian Torp-Pedersen; Olav Wendelboe Nielsen Journal: Cardiol J Date: 2022-02-11 Impact factor: 2.737