BJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

British Journal of Radiology (2006) 79, 116-122
© 2006 British Institute of Radiology
doi: 10.1259/bjr/27372198

This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schwartz, A
Right arrow Articles by Tsang, R W
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Schwartz, A
Right arrow Articles by Tsang, R W

Full Paper

An audit of imaging test utilization for the management of lymphoma in an oncology hospital: implications for resource planning?

A Schwartz, BSc, M K Gospodarowicz, MD, K Khalili, MD, M Pintilie, MSc, S Goddard, BSc, A Keller, MD and R W Tsang, MD

University of Toronto, Princess Margaret Hospital, University Health Network, 610 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2M9 Canada

Correspondence: Dr Richard W Tsang

The purpose of this study was to assist with resource planning by examining the pattern of physician utilization of imaging procedures for lymphoma patients in a dedicated oncology hospital. The proportion of imaging tests ordered for routine follow up with no specific clinical indication was quantified, with specific attention to CT scans. A 3-month audit was performed. The reasons for ordering all imaging procedures (X-rays, CT scans, ultrasound, nuclear scan and MRI) were determined through a retrospective chart review. 411 lymphoma patients had 686 assessments (sets of imaging tests) and 981 procedures (individual imaging tests). Most procedures were CT scans (52%) and chest radiographs (30%). The most common reasons for ordering imaging were assessing response (23%), and investigating new symptoms (19%). Routine follow up constituted 21% of the assessments (142/686), and of these, 82% were chest radiographs (116/142), while 24% (34/142) were CT scans. With analysis restricted to CT scans (296 assessments in 248 patients), the most common reason for ordering CT scans were response evaluation (40%), and suspicion of recurrence and/or new symptom (23%). Follow-up CT scans done with no clinical indication comprised 8% (25/296) of all CT assessments. Staging CT scans were under-represented at 6% of all assessments. Imaging with CT scans for follow up of asymptomatic patients is infrequent. However, scans done for staging new lymphoma patients were unexpectedly low in frequency, due to scans done elsewhere prior to referral. This analysis uncovered utilization patterns, helped resource planning and provided data to reduce unnecessary imaging procedures.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Br. J. Radiol.Home page
BJR review of the year - 2006
Br. J. Radiol., March 1, 2007; 80(951): 147 - 151.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING  ALL BIR JOURNALS 
Copyright © 2006 by the British Institute of Radiology.