Abstract
Recently, the state of California enacted a law requiring radiologists to record the radiation dose that each patient receives for a CT scan. Failure to do so is penalized by law. This law becomes effective in July 2012. By July 2013, every facility that performs CT scans must become accredited by one of three professional groups. This report discusses the role that legislation is playing in the practice of medicine in regard to CT practice. Inherent in this discussion is the assumption that pediatric radiologists know the right dose that a child should receive for a specific clinical indication. But do we really know the answer to this? Compared to the European radiology community, the United States radiology community lags in this regard. This paper defines diagnostic reference levels (DRL) and reviews the history of DRL in the United States compared to that in the European community and the progress by the American College of Radiology’s National Radiology Data Registry (NRDR) to establish national registries. The establishment of the first pediatric Quality Improvement Registry in CT Scans in Children (QuIRCC) and its progress to date will be discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Wiley G (2010) Exposed: radiation safety in the imaging suite. Available via http://www.imagingbiz.com/articles/view/exposed-radiation-safety-in-the-imaging-suite. Accessed 17 Sept 2010
Amis ES, Butler PF, Applegate KE et al (2007) American College of Radiology white paper on radiation dose in medicine. J Am Coll Radiol 4:272–284
American College of Radiology CT Accreditation Program. CT accreditation. Available via http://www.acr.org/accreditation/computed.aspx. Accessed 4 Feb 2011
Mammography Quality Standards Act and Program (1994) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Available via http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/MammographyQualityStandardsActandProgram/default.htm. Accessed 4 Feb 2011
Pisano ED, Schell M, Rollins J et al (2000) Has the mammography quality standards act affected the mammography quality in North Carolina? AJR 174:1089–1091
Nationwide Evaluation of X-ray Trends (NEXT) (2000) Computed Tomography CRCPD #NEXT_2000CT-T. Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors Inc. and the United States Food and Drug Administration. Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Available via http://www.CRCPD.org/NEXTasp. Accessed 4 Feb 2011
American College of Radiology National Radiology Data Registry. Available via http://www.acr.org/SecondaryMainMenuCategories/quality_safety/NRDR.aspx. Accessed 4 Feb 2011
European Atomic Energy Community (EURATOM). Available via http://ec.europa.eu/energy/nuclear/euratom/euratom_en.htm. Accessed 4 Feb 2011
Shannoun F, Blettner M, Schmidberger H et al (2008) Radiation protection in diagnostic radiology. Dtsch Arztebl Int 105:41–46
Beckmann EC (2006) CT scanning the early days. Br J Radiol 79:5–8
International Commission on Radiological Protection (1991) 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 60. Pergamon, Oxford, England
European Commission (1997) Quality criteria for computed tomography: working document. Publication EUR 16262. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium
The United States Atomic Energy Commission. Available via http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Atomic_Energy_Commission. Accessed 4 Feb 2011
National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement. Available via NCRP. http://www.ncrponline.org/AboutNCRP/About_NCRP.html. Accessed 6 Feb 2011
McBurney RE (1993) CRCPD: The First Twenty-Five Years. CRCPD Publication 93–4. Available via http://www.crcpd.org/Pubs/First25yrs-RevForWebJuly04.pdf. Accessed 4 Feb 2011
Paterson A, Frush DP, Donnelly LF (2001) Helical CT of the body: are settings adjusted for pediatric patients? AJR 176:297–301
Slovis TL (ed) (2002) ALARA conference proceedings. The ALARA concept in pediatric CT: intelligent dose reduction. Pediatr Radiol 32:217–231
Goske MJ, Applegate KE, Frush DP et al (2008) The Image Gently campaign: working together to change practice. AJR 190:273–274
Brenner DJ, Hall EJ (2007) Computed tomography: an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 357:2277–2284
Bogdanich W (2010) After stroke scans, patients face serious health risks. New York Times. Available via http://nytimes.com/2010/08/01/health/01radiation/html?_r=1&ref=general. Accessed 6 Feb 2011
White Paper: Initiative to Reduce Unnecessary Radiation Exposure from Medical Imaging. Available via http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/RadiationSafety/RadiationDoseReduction/ucm199994.htm. Accessed 5 Feb 2011
Smith-Bindman R (2010) Is computed tomography safe? N Engl J Med 363:1–4
Summary of the California Senate Bill 1237. Available via http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/sen/sb_1201-1250/sb_1237_bill_20100929_chaptered.html. Accessed 5 Feb 2011
Strauss KJ, Goske MJ, Frush DP et al (2009) Image gently vendor summit: working together for better estimates of pediatric radiation dose from CT. AJR 192:1169–1175
Brenner DJ, Hricak H (2010) Radiation exposure from medical imaging—time to regulate? JAMA 304:208–209
Hamburg MA (2010) Innovation, regulation, and the FDA. N Eng J Med 363:2228–2232
Gray JE, Archer BJ, Butler PF et al (2005) Reference values for diagnostic radiology: application and impact. Radiology 235:354–358
Disclaimer
The supplement this article is part of, is not sponsored by the medical imaging industry. Dr. Goske has no financial interests, investigational or off-label uses to disclose.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Goske, M.J. Getting it right: are regulation and registries for CT radiation dose in children the answer?. Pediatr Radiol 41 (Suppl 2), 567 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-011-2105-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-011-2105-4