Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Sep;86(1029):20130337.
doi: 10.1259/bjr.20130337. Epub 2013 Aug 9.

Justification of CT examinations in young adults and children can be improved by education, guideline implementation and increased MRI capacity

P Tahvonen  1 , H Oikarinen, E Pääkkö, A Karttunen, R Blanco Sequeiros, O Tervonen
Affiliations

Justification of CT examinations in young adults and children can be improved by education, guideline implementation and increased MRI capacity

P Tahvonen et al. Br J Radiol. 2013 Sep.

Abstract

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.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Two-sided info pocket card (updated version from 2008, translated into English).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. International Commission on Radiological Protection. The 2007 recommendations of the ICRP. Annals of the ICRP, volume 37. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Ltd; 2007.
    1. European commission Council directive of 30 June 1997 on health protection of individuals against the danger of ionizing radiation in relation to medical exposure, and reapealing directive 84/466/Euratom. Official Journal 1997;180:22–7
    1. Malone J, Guleria R, Craven C, Horton P, Jarvinen H, Mayo J, et al. Justification of diagnostic medical exposures: some practical issues. Report of an International Atomic Energy Agency Consultation. Br J Radiol 2012;85:523–38 10.1259/bjr/42893576 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shiralkar S, Rennie A, Snow M, Galland RB, Lewis MH, Gower-Thomas K. Doctors' knowledge of radiation exposure: questionnaire study. BMJ 2003;327:371–2 10.1136/bmj.327.7411.371 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lee CI, Haims AH, Monico EP, Brink JA, Forman HP. Diagnostic CT scans: assessment of patient, physician, and radiologist awareness of radiation dose and possible risks. Radiology 2004;231:393–8 10.1148/radiol.2312030767 - DOI - PubMed