Comparison of examination times between CT scanners: are the newer scanners faster?

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

(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.

Are We Overdoing It? Changes in Diagnostic Imaging Workload during the Years 2010-2020 including the Impact of the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic

Since the 1990s, there has been a significant increase in the number of imaging examinations as well as a related increase in the healthcare expenditure and the exposure of the population to X-rays. This study aimed to analyze the workload trends in radiology during the last decade, including the impact of COVID-19 in a single university hospital in Poland and to identify possible solutions to the challenges that radiology could face in the future. We compared the annual amount of computed tomography (CT), radiography (X-ray), and ultrasound (US) examinations performed between the years 2010 and 2020 and analyzed the changes in the number of practicing radiologists in Poland. The mean number of patients treated in our hospital was 60,727 per year. During the last decade, the number of CT and US examinations nearly doubled (from 87.4 to 155.7 and from 52.1 to 86.5 per 1000 patients in 2010 and 2020 respectively), while X-ray examinations decreased from 115.1 to 96.9 per 1000 patients. The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic did not change the workload trends as more chest examinations were performed. AI, which contributed to the COVID-19 diagnosis, could aid radiologists in the future with the growing workload by increasing the efficiency of radiology departments as well as by potentially minimizing the related costs.

Cost accounting in radiology: new directions and importance for policy

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to promote insight into radiology costs through improvements in assessing patient-level cost data. Accurate patient costing is a prerequisite for establishing a proper payment system-one where the price paid for a service approximates the cost of delivering that service. In the absence of an accurate payment scheme, margins can vary significantly from one patient to the next.

CONCLUSION

The resulting financial incentives skew the radiology marketplace away from the provision of efficient and appropriate care toward the selection of patients whose costs are low relative to reimbursements.

Professional resource cost of body CT examinations: Analysis of interpretation costs in different patient populations

PURPOSE

To study professional cost and cost drivers in body computed tomography (CT), and to compare the professional cost associated with similar CT studies performed on patients with dissimilar diseases.

METHODS

A time and motion study was undertaken to measure the allocation of physician time in body CT. The hourly cost of radiologists' clinical practice was calculated. The physician cost associated with individual CT patients was then calculated according to the amount of time radiologists devoted to each patient. Technical costs and hospital overhead were not included.

RESULTS

The hourly cost of the clinical practice of attending radiologists, cross-sectional imaging fellows, and senior radiology residents was $293, $35, and $35 respectively. The average professional cost for CT examination of an abdominal pain patient with abdominal and pelvic imaging was $63. The average professional cost for CT examination of an oncology patient with abdominal and pelvic imaging was $90. The cost per relative value unit (RVU) was $25 for abdominal pain patients and $35 for oncology patients.

CONCLUSION

Similar CT studies performed on patients with dissimilar diseases result in differing professional costs.

Effect of multislice CT technology on scanner productivity

OBJECTIVE

In this study we analyzed the impact of multislice CT technology on scanner productivity in a tertiary care medical center.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We compared the productivity of two diagnostic CT scanners during the periods January 1 to August 31, 1999 (when both scanners had single-slice CT capability) and January 1 to August 31, 2000 (when one of these scanners was replaced with a multislice CT scanner). The scanners were used primarily for outpatients during the day shift and for inpatients during the evening shift; the demand for CT services was stable. For this analysis, we queried the hospital's radiology information system and identified the number of CT examinations performed during the two analysis periods. We also determined the examination mix, including proportion of enhanced and unenhanced examinations and the anatomic region examined, to ensure comparable patient populations. Statistical analysis was performed.

RESULTS

The number of CT studies performed on the two scanners increased by 1772 (13.1%) from 13,548 (before multislice CT) to 15,320 (when multislice CT was available). The number of examinations enhanced with contrast media increased from 52% to 65%. Between 9:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., the number of CT examinations was similar on the single-slice scanners in the two periods (p > 0.05). However, in the period when multislice CT was available, the number of studies performed on the multislice scanner (5919) was 51.9% higher than those performed using the single-slice scanner (3896) (p < 0.0006).

CONCLUSION

Using a multislice CT scanner leads to an increase in CT productivity, even though multislice studies are performed using more complicated protocols than are used on a single-slice CT scanner.