|
|
||||||||
1
Division of Pediatric Radiology, Department of Radiology, McGovern-Davison
Children's Health Center, Rm. 1905, Duke University Health System, Box 3808,
Erwin Rd., Durham, NC 27710.
2
Division of Emergency Medicine, Departments of Surgery and Pediatrics, Duke
University Health System, Durham, NC 27710.
OBJECTIVE. CT technique should be adjusted while scanning infants and children. One format that has proven successful in simplifying pediatric care and reducing medical error is the size-based, color-coded Broselow-Luten pediatric system. This color-coded system can serve as a format for CT protocols. The purpose of this investigation was to compare variation (or error) occurrence and technologist preference for conventional and color-coded formats for pediatric multidetector body CT protocols.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. Multidetector CT examinations were set up using either a conventional or a color-coded format for a period of 6 weeks each. Variations (errors) from protocol parameters (including tube current, detector configuration, table speed, and IV contrast media dose) were tabulated. Qualitative assessment consisted of a survey of CT technologists (n = 20) for preference in six areas related to ease of use and clarity of the formats.
RESULTS. There were 44 CT examinations (n = 30 infants and children) in the conventional group and 55 CT examinations (n = 31 infants and children) in the color-coded protocol format group. Overall, the number of errors was significantly less in the color-coded group (p < 0.01), with a significantly lower error percentage in individual parameters affecting radiation dose, including tube current, detector configuration, and table speed (p < 0.05). In all areas, the color-coded format was preferred over the conventional format (p < 0.0003).
CONCLUSION. Color-coded CT formatting is an extension of a clinical color-coded system. This system provides an easy, expeditious, consistent, and preferable format for general pediatric body CT protocols. Most importantly, the color-coded system can reduce variations (errors) in the radiology department.
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
A. M. Alessio, P. E. Kinahan, V. Manchanda, V. Ghioni, L. Aldape, and M. T. Parisi Weight-Based, Low-Dose Pediatric Whole-Body PET/CT Protocols J. Nucl. Med., October 1, 2009; 50(10): 1570 - 1578. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Singh, M. K. Kalra, M. A. Moore, R. Shailam, B. Liu, T. L. Toth, E. Grant, and S. J. Westra Dose Reduction and Compliance with Pediatric CT Protocols Adapted to Patient Size, Clinical Indication, and Number of Prior Studies Radiology, July 1, 2009; 252(1): 200 - 208. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Honnef, J. E. Wildberger, G. Haras, C. Hohl, G. Staatz, R. W. Gunther, and A. H. Mahnken Prospective Evaluation of Image Quality with Use of a Patient Image Gallery for Dose Reduction in Pediatric 16-MDCT Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2008; 190(2): 467 - 473. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W Mazrani, K McHugh, and P J Marsden The radiation burden of radiological investigations Arch. Dis. Child., December 1, 2007; 92(12): 1127 - 1131. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Z. Wong, E. K. Paulson, R. C. Nelson, E. F. Patz Jr., and R. E. Coleman Practical Approach to Diagnostic CT Combined with PET Am. J. Roentgenol., March 1, 2007; 188(3): 622 - 629. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P C Shrimpton, M C Hillier, M A Lewis, and M Dunn National survey of doses from CT in the UK: 2003 Br. J. Radiol., December 1, 2006; 79(948): 968 - 980. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T Flohr and B Ohnesorge Developments in CT Imaging, June 1, 2006; 18(2): 45 - 61. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Kohl The Evolution and State-of-the-Art Principles of Multislice Computed Tomography Proceedings of the ATS, December 1, 2005; 2(6): 470 - 476. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Dalal, M. K. Kalra, S. M. R. Rizzo, B. Schmidt, C. Suess, T. Flohr, M. A. Blake, and S. Saini Metallic Prosthesis: Technique to Avoid Increase in CT Radiation Dose with Automatic Tube Current Modulation in a Phantom and Patients Radiology, August 1, 2005; 236(2): 671 - 675. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. G. Flohr, S. Schaller, K. Stierstorfer, H. Bruder, B. M. Ohnesorge, and U. J. Schoepf Multi-Detector Row CT Systems and Image-Reconstruction Techniques Radiology, June 1, 2005; 235(3): 756 - 773. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. M. R. Rizzo, M. K. Kalra, M. M. Maher, M. A. Blake, T. L. Toth, and S. Saini Do Metallic Endoprostheses Increase Radiation Dose Associated with Automatic Tube-Current Modulation in Abdominal-Pelvic MDCT? A Phantom and Patient Study Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2005; 184(2): 491 - 496. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. K. Kalra, M. M. Maher, M. A. Blake, B. C. Lucey, K. Karau, T. L. Toth, G. Avinash, E. F. Halpern, and S. Saini Detection and Characterization of Lesions on Low-Radiation-Dose Abdominal CT Images Postprocessed with Noise Reduction Filters Radiology, September 1, 2004; 232(3): 791 - 797. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. S. Frush, X. Luo, P. Hutchinson, and J. N. Higgins Evaluation of a Method to Reduce Over-the-Counter Medication Dosing Error Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med, July 1, 2004; 158(7): 620 - 624. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. P. Frush, L. F. Donnelly, and N. S. Rosen Computed Tomography and Radiation Risks: What Pediatric Health Care Providers Should Know Pediatrics, October 1, 2003; 112(4): 951 - 957. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. N. Shah, K. Frush, X. Luo, and R. L. Wears Effect of an Intervention Standardization System on Pediatric Dosing and Equipment Size Determination: A Crossover Trial Involving Simulated Resuscitation Events Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med, March 1, 2003; 157(3): 229 - 236. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |