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
. 2023 Jan 20;13(2):289.
doi: 10.3390/life13020289.

Gender Differences in the Impact of Recommendations on Diagnostic Imaging Tests: A Retrospective Study 2007-2021

Lucy A Parker  1   2 , Andrea Moreno-Garijo  3 , Elisa Chilet-Rosell  1   2 , Fermina Lorente  4 , Blanca Lumbreras  1   2
Affiliations

Gender Differences in the Impact of Recommendations on Diagnostic Imaging Tests: A Retrospective Study 2007-2021

Lucy A Parker et al. Life (Basel). .

Abstract

(1) Background: The frequency of imaging tests grew exponentially in recent years. This increase may differ according to a patient's sex, age, or socioeconomic status. We aim to analyze the impact of the Council Directive 2013/59/Euratom to control exposure to radiation for men and women and explore the impact of patients' age and socioeconomic status; (2) Methods: The retrospective observational study that includes a catchment population of 234,424. We included data of CT, mammography, radiography (conventional radiography and fluoroscopy) and nuclear medicine between 2007-2021. We estimated the associated radiation effective dose per test according using previously published evidence. We calculated a deprivation index according to the postcode of their residence. We divided the study in 2007-2013, 2014-2019 and 2020-2021 (the pandemic period). (3) Results: There was an increase in the number of imaging tests received by men and women after 2013 (p < 0.001), and this increase was higher in women than in men. The frequency of imaging tests decreased during the pandemic period (2020-2021), but the frequency of CT and nuclear medicine tests increased even during these years (p < 0.001) and thus, the overall effective mean dose. Women and men living in the least deprived areas had a higher frequency of imaging test than those living in the most deprived areas. (4) Conclusions: The largest increase in the number of imaging tests is due to CTs, which account for the higher amount of effective dose. The difference in the increase of imaging tests carried out in men and women and according to the socioeconomic status could reflect different management strategies and barriers to access in clinical practice. Given the low impact of the available recommendations on the population exposure to radiation and the performance of high-dose procedures such as CT, deserve special attention when it comes to justification and optimization, especially in women.

Keywords: gender; imaging tests; radiation exposure; recommendations; socioeconomical status.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Distribution of the frequency of imaging test per 1000 habitants per men and women according to the patients’ age and calendar time.
Figure 1
Figure 1
Distribution of the frequency of imaging test per 1000 habitants per men and women according to the patients’ age and calendar time.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Distribution of the frequency of imaging test per 1000 habitants per men and women according to the patients’ deprivation index and calendar time.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Distribution of the frequency of imaging test per 1000 habitants per men and women according to the patients’ deprivation index and calendar time.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Mettler F.A., Jr., Bhargavan M., Faulkner K., Gilley D.B., Gray J.E., Ibbott G.S., Lipoti J.A., Mahesh M., McCrohan J.L., Stabin M.G., et al. Radiologic and nuclear medicine studies in the United States and worldwide: Frequency, radiation dose, and comparison with other radiation sources—1950–2007. Radiology. 2009;253:520–531. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2532082010. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Skrk D., Zontar D. Estimated collective effective dose to the population from nuclear medicine examinations in Slovenia. Radiol. Oncol. 2013;47:304–310. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Huppmann M.V., Johnson W.B., Javitt M.C. Radiation risks from exposure to chest computed tomography. Semin. Ultrasound CT MR. 2010;31:14–28. doi: 10.1053/j.sult.2009.09.003. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sodickson A., Baeyens P.F., Andriole K.P., Prevedello L.M., Nawfel R.D., Hanson R., Khorasani R., Recurrent C.T. Cumulative radiation exposure, and associated radiation-induced cancer risks from CT of adults. Radiology. 2009;251:175–184. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2511081296. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lumbreras B., González-Alvarez I., Gómez-Sáez N., Lorente M.F., Hernández-Aguado I. Management of patients with incidental findings in imaging tests: A large prospective single-center study. Clin. Imaging. 2014;38:249–254. doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2013.12.018. - DOI - PubMed