Emergency Department Radiology Research Articles

Process modification and emergency department radiology service

Our purpose was to demonstrate the impact of changes in technology, staffing, and departmental processes on service levels in emergency department (ED) radiology. We also attempted to determine if report turnaround time affects ED patient throughput. Radiology performance was evaluated before and after the modifications of processes integral to the interpretation of ED imaging. Picture archiving and communication system, voice recognition (VR), staffing, physical site, work flow, and administrative modifications were undertaken over approximately 2 years. The average time interval from the exam completion to report signature was 5,184 min (standard deviation (SD) of 1,858 min before the implementation of VR and other modifications of ED radiology processes). In post initial modifications, it was 150 min (SD, 169 min) and 157 min (SD, 215 min) in post additional modifications. The percentage of the signed written reports available in less than or equal to 60 min was 0%, 27%, and 40%, respectively. Ongoing improvements are needed to increase the service levels for ED radiology. Further improvement will require collaboration and adjustment with the ongoing assessment of metrics.

Foreign body aspiration in a child detected through emergency department radiology reporting: a case report

Foreign-body aspiration remains a leading cause of mortality in children under 3 years despite child-safety initiatives. This case report describes a classic history of peanut aspiration in a young child. Unfortunately, the diagnosis was delayed and only detected the next day through radiology review. The clinical history is paramount and this case highlights how emergency radiology reporting can minimize morbidity.

Interdepartmental Problem-Solving as a Method for Teaching and Learning Systems-Based Practice

Systems-based practice (SBP) has been the most difficult competency to implement in radiology residency programs, and methods for teaching and learning SBP concepts are needed. Because systems problems are usually multifactorial, a multidisciplinary approach is required. In our institution, survey data indicated patient dissatisfaction with emergency care. Prolonged wait times for radiology procedures were identified as a systems problem. When hospital administration asked the emergency medicine and radiology departments to work together to improve patient care, residents had a "real-world" opportunity to achieve the SBP competency. Systems problems were identified and categorized. Data on patient transport were collected. Accurate time logs documenting when studies were ordered, performed, and interpreted were maintained. Data were analyzed at interdepartmental meetings and three improvements were planned and implemented. A direct line of communication was established between radiology and emergency medicine via a dedicated cellular telephone. A joint emergency medicine/radiology teaching conference was established. Additional transport personnel were employed. Residents in both departments increased their understanding of their role in the health care system, demonstrated an ability to identify systems problems and appropriately implement improvements, and enhanced their professional relationships. This innovative method integrated educational goals with patient care goals, was grounded in "real-life" experience, and held residents accountable for results. Competence in SBP, patient care, professionalism, and interpersonal and communication skills were demonstrated. We recommend this approach as an efficient and effective way to integrate SBP into everyday clinical practice.

Development of an accelerated MSCT protocol (Triage MSCT) for mass casualty incidents: comparison to MSCT for single-trauma patients

During multiple casualty incidents (MCI) emergency radiology departments have to deal with a large number of patients with suspected severe trauma within a short period of time. The aim of this study was to develop a suitable accelerated multislice computed tomography (MSCT) protocol to increase patient throughput for this kind of emergency situation. We presumed a scenario of 15 patients being admitted to the trauma service with suspicion of severe injuries after a MCI over a period of 2 h. An accelerated Triage MSCT protocol was developed and evaluated for MSCT scanner productivity (patients per hour) and time (minutes) needed for a total MSCT body workup using an anthropomorphic phantom. In addition, time (minutes) for transfer and preparation was measured. These timeframes were compared to a control group consisting of 144 single patients with multiple trauma undergoing standard MSCT according to our trauma room protocol. All MSCT studies were conducted using a 4-detector row scanner. (1) For the study group (Triage MSCT), average time for patient transfer and preparation was 2.9 min (2.5-4.3 min), mean CT examination time was 2.1 min (1.7-2.4 min); image reconstruction took 4.0 min (3.3-4.3 min). Total time in scanner room was 8.9 min (7.7-11.3 min), resulting in a maximal productivity of 6.7 patients per hour. Image transfer to the digital picture archive and communication system archive was completed after an average 9.5 min (8.9-10.8 min). (2) For the control group (single casualty MSCT), the mean time for patient transfer and preparation was 20.4 min (9.0-39.2 min), mean examination time was 6.0 min (3.1-11.3 min). Times for image reconstructions were not recorded in the patient series. Mean total time in scanner room was 25.3 min (11.0-72.4 min), resulting in a patient throughput of 2.4 patients per hour. MSCT has potential to serve as a powerful tool in triage of multiple casualty patients. The introduction of a Triage MSCT scanning protocol resulted in an increase of patient throughput per hour by a factor of almost 3.

Advanced Opportunities for Student Education in Emergency Medicine

AbstractMany medical students are excited about emergency medicine (EM) following a standard clerkship and seek out additional learning opportunities. An advanced EM elective may accomplish several educational goals, including development of clinical skills in evaluating the undifferentiated patient, broader exploration of the field of EM, and more focused study of one particular aspect of EM. Previously cited examples include pediatric EM, medical toxicology, occupational medicine, sports medicine, and EM research. Numerous other EM specialty courses for senior medical students are emerging, as reflected in the “Undergraduate Rotations” listings on the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. A few examples drawn from the list include emergency ultrasound, international EM, wilderness medicine, disaster medicine, geriatric EM, and hyperbaric medicine. Educators aspiring to develop, or in the process of developing, an advanced EM elective may benefit from a brief overview of necessary course considerations, including didactic format, the clinical role of the medical student in the emergency department, and involvement with patient procedures. Suggestions are made regarding additional educational opportunities, including follow‐up of patients seen in the emergency department and development of an emergency department radiology case file. This article also addresses several related concerns, including suggested prerequisites, administration and cost considerations, appropriate didactic topics, and methods for evaluating students. Several EM subspecialty areas, namely pediatric EM, medical toxicology, and out‐of‐hospital care, are specifically discussed. Formal advanced cardiac life support training is also often included in an advanced EM elective and is briefly discussed. The overall intent of this article is to provide medical student educators with resources and ideas to assist them in developing a unique advanced EM elective.

Role of routine nonenhanced head computed tomography scan in excluding orbital, maxillary, or zygomatic fractures secondary to blunt head trauma.

The purpose of this paper is to determine the necessity of a dedicated facial bone/orbital computed tomography (CT) scan for fracture surveillance in patients who have suffered blunt head trauma and whose routine nonenhanced head CT scan is negative. It is based on a retrospective review of 115 patients presenting to the Emergency Department at a level I trauma center after blunt head trauma. Included patients underwent both a nonenhanced head CT scan and a dedicated facial bone or orbit CT. Standard nonenhanced head CT protocol was followed for each patient as per department protocol. A positive head CT scan is defined to include either an air-fluid level within the paranasal sinuses or fracture of the maxillary, orbital, or zygomatic osseous structures. A negative scan demonstrates none of these findings. Intracranial/parenchymal pathology was not evaluated in this study. Sixty-five of the 115 patients had a negative head CT scan as defined above. Of these 65 patients, none subsequently had a positive facial bone or orbit CT scan. The sensitivity and negative predictive values of a negative routine nonenhanced head CT scan for fracture surveillance are both 100%. In the setting of blunt trauma, a negative nonenhanced head CT scan precludes the need for a dedicated facial bone or orbital CT scan in the evaluation for orbital, maxillary, or zygomatic fractures. This saves the patient unnecessary radiation exposure, health care costs, and time spent in the emergency radiology department.

Rings and things on upper extremity radiographs of emergency patients.

Rings, intravenous lines, and other objects on the injured upper extremities of trauma patients are frequently overlooked by radiology and emergency department (ED) personnel. This can impair proper radiologic evaluation of the injured extremity as well as negatively affect the quality of the patient's treatment. A 1-week sample of radiographs of injured upper extremities from the ED of University Medical Center (UMC), Tucson, Arizona, showed that 20% of the studies (19 of 95) contained at least one object on the injured upper extremity, but only one radiology report (1.1%) mentioned such an object. A review of 2489 upper extremity ED radiology reports from January to June 2002 showed only 47 reports (1.9%) that mentioned the presence of an overlying object. It is important to educate radiology department and ED personnel to remove upper extremity jewelry and place necessary medical devices on noninjured extremities.

Emergency ultrasound services as perceived by directors of radiology and emergency departments.

Despite widespread concern that emergency ultrasound services are not widely available after regular business hours, data supporting or refuting this concern have not been reported. To determine the availability of emergency ultrasound services as perceived by directors of emergency departments (EDs) and radiology departments, direct mail survey was sent to both ED Directors and Directors of Radiology at 100 large teaching hospitals (more than 300 beds) and 100 smaller nonteaching hospitals (fewer than 300 beds) chosen at random from the American Heart Association Guide. Questions elicited the directors' perceptions of availability of emergency ultrasound services in their own institutions as well as their attitudes toward performance of ultrasound examinations by emergency physicians. The overall response rate was 53%. It was found that 24-hour in-house ultrasound services are rarely available even in large teaching hospitals, even as reported by Directors of Radiology. ED Directors and Directors of Radiology differ significantly in perceptions of ultrasound availability, clinical importance of emergency ultrasound, and desirability of ultrasound performance by ED physicians.

Application of Clinical Indicators in the Emergency Department

Clinical indicators were developed and used to assess the quality of patient care resulting from the system of shared responsibility between emergency department (ED) and radiology department faculty physicians for interpretation of ED roentgenograms. The first indicator--all discrepancies in roentgenogram interpretation between ED and radiology department faculty--measured an overall discrepancy rate of 3.3% (776 films). Three hundred fifty-two apparent discrepancies were not related to the accuracy with which ED faculty interpreted films, resulting in a revised overall discrepancy rate of 1.8%. The second indicator--undesirable patient care outcomes as a result of delayed accurate radiological diagnosis--measured an occurrence rate of 0 after clinical reevaluation of more than 99% of patients within 24 hours of initial ED evaluation. Aspects of the development and use of clinical indicators are discussed in relationship to the broader monitoring and evaluating process necessary for the continuous improvement of patient care.

An emergency department radiology audit procedure

An audit was done to ascertain the concordance of radiographic interpretation by the emergency physician and the radiologist. In 8,021 radiographic procedures during the two-month study, concordance of interpretation was found in 97.6%. The primary area of interpretation difficulty was chest radiographs. Specifically, there was limited agreement (10 of 45 films, 22%) regarding the reading of inflammatory processes. Despite this, 40 of the 45 patients (89%) whose chest radiographs were reviewed received proper therapy. The findings in five radiographs were deemed to be significant enough to possibly lead to changes in management.