HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Hagel, J. Articles by Bicknell, S. G. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Hagel, J. Articles by Bicknell, S. G. Social Bookmarking                      What's this? Hotlight (NEW!) What's Hotlight?

Impact of 3D Sonography on Workroom Time Efficiency

¹ Department of Radiology, University of British Columbia, Rm. 335-0950, West 10th Ave., Vancouver, BC, Canada V5Z 1M9.
² Department of Radiology, Lions Gate Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect on workroom time efficiency of the 3D sonographic technique compared with the 2D technique in examinations of the kidney, shoulder, small parts (thyroid, testes, Achilles tendon, other superficial structures), and female pelvic organs in a community hospital.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS. A random sample of 23 patients underwent consecutive 3D sonographic examinations on a single day. Another random sample of 40 patients underwent consecutive traditional 2D sonographic examinations the next day. Both cohorts included a mixture of patients who underwent shoulder, renal, small-parts, and pelvic scans. The 3D shoulder examinations were followed by direct examination by a radiologist using the traditional 2D technique to confirm the diagnostic accuracy of the 3D technique. The mean times that patients were in the sonography room for 2D and for 3D sonography were recorded and compared by use of a two-sample Student's t test.

RESULTS. The mean time per examination for the 3D cohort was 11.48 ± 3.55 minutes (SD). The mean time per examination for the 2D cohort was 25.30 ± 11.64 minutes. Results of a two-sample Student's t test showed the times for the two groups were statistically different (p < 0.001). No diagnoses made with 3D shoulder sonographic findings were changed when the shoulders were reevaluated directly by radiologists using conventional 2D sonography.

CONCLUSION. This study showed significantly better workroom time efficiency with use of 3D sonography than with traditional 2D sonography in pelvic, renal, small-parts, and shoulder examinations in a community hospital. These findings suggest that in the correct clinical setting, adopting 3D scanning protocols may greatly improve patient throughput.

Keywords: musculoskeletal imaging • 3D sonography

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. R. Wilson, C. Gupta, M. Eliasziw, and A. Andrew Volume Imaging in the Abdomen With Ultrasound: How We Do It Am. J. Roentgenol., July 1, 2009; 193(1): 79 - 85. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. C. Kim, D. M. Yang, S. H. Lee, and Y. D. Cho Usefulness of Renal Volume Measurements Obtained by a 3-Dimensional Sonographic Transducer With Matrix Electronic Arrays J. Ultrasound Med., December 1, 2008; 27(12): 1673 - 1681. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]