Pediatric CT quality management and improvement program
- 274 Downloads
Modern CT is a powerful yet increasingly complex technology that continues to rapidly evolve; optimal clinical implementation as well as appropriate quality management and improvement in CT are challenging but attainable. This article outlines the organizational structure on which a CT quality management and improvement program can be built, followed by a discussion of common as well as pediatric-specific challenges. Organizational elements of a CT quality management and improvement program include the formulation of clear objectives; definition of the roles and responsibilities of key personnel; implementation of a technologist training, coaching and feedback program; and use of an efficient and accurate monitoring system. Key personnel and roles include a radiologist as the CT director, a qualified CT medical physicist, as well as technologists with specific responsibilities and adequate time dedicated to operation management, CT protocol management and CT technologist education. Common challenges in managing a clinical CT operation are related to the complexity of newly introduced technology, of training and communication and of performance monitoring. Challenges specific to pediatric patients include the importance of including patient size in protocol and dose considerations, a lower tolerance for error in these patients, and a smaller sample size from which to learn and improve.
KeywordsComputed tomography Quality management Quality improvement Pediatric, personnel
Conflicts of interest
Dr. Larson discloses a commercial interest in Radimetrics and has no investigational or off-label uses to disclose. Drs. Molvin, Wang, Chan, Newman and Fleischmann have no financial interests, investigational or off-label uses to disclose.
- 3.Frush DP, Morin R, Rehani MM (2013) Monitoring of medical radiation exposure for individuals. In: Lau L, Kwan-Hoong N (eds) Radiology safety and quality. Springer, New York, pp 69–84Google Scholar
- 7.(1991) Standards for protection against radiation — Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Final rule. Fed Regist 56:23360–23474Google Scholar
- 8.National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (2012) Reference levels and achievable doses in medical and dental imaging: recommendations for the United States. NCRPM report 172. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Bethesda, MDGoogle Scholar
- 9.Larson DB, Wang LL, Podberesky DJ et al (2013) System for verifiable CT radiation dose optimization based on image quality. Part I: optimization model. Radiology 269:167–176Google Scholar
- 10.Larson DB, Malarik RJ, Hall SM et al (2013) System for verifiable CT radiation dose optimization based on image quality. Part II: process control system. Radiology 269:177–185Google Scholar
- 11.Fleischmann D (2009) Contrast medium administration in computed tomographic angiography. In: Rubin GD, Rofsky NM (eds) CT and MR angiography. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 129–154Google Scholar
- 14.Renne J, Falck CV, Ringe KI et al. (2013) CT angiography for pulmonary embolism detection: the effect of breathing on pulmonary artery enhancement using a 64-row detector system. Acta Radiol [Epub ahead of print]Google Scholar
- 17.Wang J, Christner JA, Duan X et al (2012) Attenuation-based estimation of patient size for the purpose of size specific dose estimation in CT. Part II. Implementation on abdomen and thorax phantoms using cross sectional CT images and scanned projection radiograph images. Med Phys 39:6772–6778PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar