AJR ARRS Member Benefits
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Winter, J
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Winter, J
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 131, Issue 1, 89-93
Copyright © 1978 by American Roentgen Ray Society


Articles

Efficiency of utilization of a computed tomography scanner

J Winter

Efficient utilization of diagnostically effective but expensive computed tomography (CT) brain scanners requires understanding of time factors influencing patient throughput. In a study at UCLA Medical Center using an EMI Mark I brain scanner, the average number of patients studied was 16.3 per 15.5 hr workday, for an average of 52.7 min per patient. Of the patients, 51.5% were inpatients at UCLA, 45% received intravenous iodinated constrast infusion, and 33% had studies showing significant abnormalities. The x-ray tube was on 51.1% of the time the scanner facility was open, with scanning averaging 34.6 min per patient. The average number of images obtained was 10.4 per patient at 3.4 min per image. Patient handling, including contrast infusion, accounted for an additional 16.2 min per patient or 34.4% of the total time utilization. Anesthesia lengthened the procedure by 1 hr but was needed in only 4.5% of the cases. Flexible scheduling was essential, since 14% of the patients failed to keep their appointments or had their studies cancelled. These timing data suggest that the faster, more expensive CT scanners being introduced, while having diagnostic advantage for body scanning, will not significantly decrease cost per patient when used for brain scanning compared with the first generation machine studied.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1978 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.