2000
DOI: 10.1007/s003300051055
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Vetting requests for body computed tomography

Abstract: The aim of this study was to assess the process and outcome of hospitalised patients (inpatients) for whom whole-body CT was requested but not performed. For 6 months the reasons why CT was not performed were recorded, together with relevant discussions with clinicians. Subsequent referrals for alternative investigations were noted. The eventual outcome of the patients was monitored via the patients' records. Eighty-three (8%) of 1001 inpatient requests were identified for which body CT was not performed after… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Radiologists' response of seeking more information from the clinician takes time, but direct contact between clinician and radiologist can facilitate appropriate examinations and improve patient care [1]. Returning referrals may be less time-consuming, but clinicians may respond by adjusting the clinical information or by gaining approval for a doubtful referral elsewhere [32]. Changing the imaging investigation without contacting the clinician may be more effective and better for the patient, but may upset the clinician [33].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Radiologists' response of seeking more information from the clinician takes time, but direct contact between clinician and radiologist can facilitate appropriate examinations and improve patient care [1]. Returning referrals may be less time-consuming, but clinicians may respond by adjusting the clinical information or by gaining approval for a doubtful referral elsewhere [32]. Changing the imaging investigation without contacting the clinician may be more effective and better for the patient, but may upset the clinician [33].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…A number of documents have been published containing information on the clinical indications for CT in order to assist referring physicians to come to an informed decision on whether they should prescribe a CT exam, in the case that they may be in doubt [40][41][42] . While CT is a valuable tool within the diagnostic chain, there are many cases where a CT examination is not actually necessary [43] . Alternative radiation-free imaging modalities, such as ultrasound and MRI, should be used instead, when they may provide the same or even better diagnostic information than CT [44] .…”
Section: Radiation Riskmentioning
confidence: 99%