Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic Shifts Inpatient Imaging Utilization

ObjectiveThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a significant impact on imaging utilization across practice settings. The purpose of this study was to quantify the change in the composition of inpatient imaging volumes for modality types and Current Procedural Terminology–coded groups during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsA retrospective study of inpatient imaging volumes in a large health care system was performed, analyzing weekly imaging volumes by modality types (radiography, CT, MRI, ultrasound, interventional radiology, nuclear medicine) in years 2020 and 2019. The data set was split to compare pre-COVID-19 (weeks 1-9) and post-COVID-19 (weeks 10-16) periods. Further subanalyses compared early post-COVID-19 (weeks 10-13) and late post-COVID-19 (weeks 14-16) periods. Statistical comparisons were performed using χ² and independent-samples t tests.ResultsCompared with 2019, total inpatient imaging volume in 2020 post-COVID-19, early and late post-COVID-19 periods, declined by 13.6% (from 78,902 to 68,168), 16.6% (from 45,221 to 37,732), and 9.6% (from 33,681 to 30,436), respectively. By week 16, inpatient imaging volume rebounded and was only down 4.2% (from 11,003 to 10,546). However, a statistically significant shift (P < .0001) in the 2020 composition mix was observed largely comprised of radiography (74.3%), followed by CT (12.7%), ultrasound (8%), MRI (2.4%), interventional radiology (2.3%), and nuclear medicine (0.4%). Although the vast majority of imaging studies declined, few Current Procedural Terminology–coded groups showed increased trends in imaging volumes in the late post-COVID-19 period, including CT angiography chest, radiography chest, and ultrasound venous duplex.DiscussionDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, we observed a decrease in inpatient imaging volumes accompanied by a shift away from cross-sectional imaging toward radiography. These findings could have significant implications in planning for a potential resurgence.     

The Battle Against Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Emergency Management and Infection Control in a Radiology Department

ObjectiveTo describe the strategy and the emergency management and infection control procedure of our radiology department during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak.MethodsWe set up emergency management and sensing control teams. The team formulated various measures: reconfiguration of the radiology department, personal protection and training of staff, examination procedures for patients suspected of or confirmed with COVID-19 as well as patients without an exposure history or symptoms. Those with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection were scanned in the designated fever-CT unit.ResultsFrom January 21, 2020, to March 9, 2020, 3,083 people suspected or confirmed to be infected with COVID-19 underwent fever-CT examinations. Including initial examinations and re-examinations, the total number of fever-CT examinations numbered 3,340. As a result of our precautions, none of the staff of the radiology department were infected with COVID-19.ConclusionStrategic planning and adequate protections can help protect patients and staff against a highly infectious disease while maintaining function at a high-volume capacity.     

Impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic on Imaging Case Volumes

ObjectiveThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had significant economic impact on radiology with markedly decreased imaging case volumes. The purpose of this study was to quantify the imaging volumes during the COVID-19 pandemic across patient service locations and imaging modality types.MethodsImaging case volumes in a large health care system were retrospectively studied, analyzing weekly imaging volumes by patient service locations (emergency department, inpatient, outpatient) and modality types (x-ray, mammography, CT, MRI, ultrasound, interventional radiology, nuclear medicine) in years 2020 and 2019. The data set was split to compare pre-COVID-19 (weeks 1-9) and post-COVID-19 (weeks 10-16) periods. Independent-samples t tests compared the mean weekly volumes in 2020 and 2019.ResultsTotal imaging volume in 2020 (weeks 1-16) declined by 12.29% (from 522,645 to 458,438) compared with 2019. Post-COVID-19 (weeks 10-16) revealed a greater decrease (28.10%) in imaging volumes across all patient service locations (range 13.60%-56.59%) and modality types (range 14.22%-58.42%). Total mean weekly volume in 2020 post-COVID-19 (24,383 [95% confidence interval 19,478-29,288]) was statistically reduced (P = .003) compared with 33,913 [95% confidence interval 33,429-34,396] in 2019 across all patient service locations and modality types. The greatest decline in 2020 was seen at week 16 specifically for outpatient imaging (88%) affecting all modality types: mammography (94%), nuclear medicine (85%), MRI (74%), ultrasound (64%), interventional (56%), CT (46%), and x-ray (22%).DiscussionBecause the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic remains uncertain, these results may assist in guiding short- and long-term practice decisions based on the magnitude of imaging volume decline across different patient service locations and specific imaging modality types.     

Imaging Utilization During the COVID-19 Pandemic Highlights Socioeconomic Health Disparities

ObjectiveThe devastating impact from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic highlights long-standing socioeconomic health disparities in the United States. The purpose of this study was to evaluate socioeconomic factors related to imaging utilization during the pandemic.MethodsRetrospective review of consecutive imaging examinations was performed from January 1, 2019, to May 31, 2020, across all service locations (inpatient, emergency, outpatient). Patient level data were provided for socioeconomic factors (age, sex, race, insurance status, residential zip code). Residential zip code was used to assign median income level. The weekly total imaging volumes in 2020 and 2019 were plotted from January 1 to May 31 stratified by socioeconomic factors to demonstrate the trends during the pre-COVID-19 (January 1 to February 28) and post-COVID-19 (March 1 to May 31) periods. Independent-samples t tests were used to statistically compare the 2020 and 2019 socioeconomic groups.ResultsCompared with 2019, the 2020 total imaging volume in the post-COVID-19 period revealed statistically significant increased imaging utilization in patients who are aged 60 to 79 years (P = .0025), are male (P < .0001), are non-White (Black, Asian, other, unknown; P < .05), are covered by Medicaid or uninsured (P < .05), and have income below $80,000 (P < .05). However, there was a significant decrease in imaging utilization among patients who are younger (<18 years old; P < .0001), are female (P < .0001), are White (P = .0003), are commercially insured (P < .0001), and have income ≥$80,000 (P < .05).DiscussionDuring the pandemic, there was a significant change in imaging utilization varying by socioeconomic factors, consistent with the known health disparities observed in the prevalence of COVID-19. These findings could have significant implications in directing utilization of resources during the pandemic and subsequent recovery.     

河南省医用X射线诊断应用频度调查

目的 探讨河南省医用X射线诊断应用分布特点及影响因素，估算全省医用X射线诊断应用频度，为放射诊断的合理应用提供依据。方法 采用分层配额抽样的方法选取河南省6个地市不同级别共58家医疗机构为样本医院，调查接受X射线诊断受检者的性别、年龄、检查类型、检查部位等分布信息，并对结果加以分析。结果 样本医院中受检者男女比例较为平均，接近1：1；"40~"年龄组比例最高，占60.47%；X射线诊断检查主要为常规X射线摄影和CT检查，分别占52.15%和40.31%；胸部检查在常规X射线摄影和CT检查中应用人次均最高，分别占总检查人次23.84%和13.25%。CT检查集中在二级和三级医院，分别占CT检查人次的21.54%和72.99%；造影检查、乳腺摄影和体外碎石集中在三级医院，分别占同类型检查人次的77.82%、95.01%、100%，一级及其他医院主要进行常规X射线摄影检查，常规摄影检查人次数占一级及其他医院所有检查类型人次数的79.04%。利用多重线性回归模型估算2016年河南省医用X射线诊断频度为826人次/千人口，其中普通X射线诊断检查（包括常规X射线摄影、透视、造影、口腔、乳腺摄影、碎石等放射诊断检查）频度和CT检查频度分别为541人次/千人口和285人次/千人口。结论 河南省近年来医疗照射频度水平发展很快，各类放射诊断设备在各级医院分布的不均衡为开展放射卫生工作提出了较大挑战。相关部门应及时调整各级医院放射诊断设备配备、合理利用卫生资源。     

Patients characteristics related to screening mammography cancellation and rescheduling rates during the COVID-19 pandemic

PurposeTo identify patient characteristics associated with screening mammography cancellations and rescheduling during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsScheduled screening mammograms during three time periods were retrospectively reviewed: state-mandated shutdown (3/17/2020-6/16/2020) during which screening mammography was cancelled, a period of 2 months immediately after screening mammography resumed (6/17/2020-8/16/2020), and a representative period prior to COVID-19 (6/17/2019-8/16/2019). Relative risk of cancellation before COVID-19 and after reopening was compared for age, race/ethnicity, insurance, history of chronic disease, and exam location, controlling for other collected variables. Risk of failure to reschedule was similarly compared between all 3 time periods.ResultsOverall cancellation rate after reopening was higher than before shutdown (7663/16595, 46% vs 5807/15792, 37%; p < 0.001). Relative risk of cancellation after reopening increased with age (1.20 vs 1.27 vs 1.36 for ages at 25th, 50th, and 75th quartile or 53, 61, and 70 years, respectively, p < 0.001). Relative risk of cancellation was also higher among Medicare patients (1.41) compared to Medicaid and those with other providers (1.26 and 1.21, respectively, p < 0.001) and non-whites compared to whites (1.34 vs 1.25, p = 0.03). Rescheduling rate during shutdown was higher than before COVID-19 and after reopening for all patients (10,658/13593, 78%, 3569/5807, 61%, and 4243/7663, respectively, 55%, p < 0.001). Relative risk of failure to reschedule missed mammogram was higher in hospitals compared to outpatient settings both during shutdown and after reopening (0.62 vs 0.54, p = 0.005 and 1.29 vs 1.03, p < 0.001, respectively).ConclusionMinority race/ethnicity, Medicare insurance, and advanced age were associated with increased risk of screening mammogram cancellation during COVID-19.     

Implementation and Impact of a Comprehensive Radiology Report Categorization System on Communication of Important Results

PurposeEffective communication of important imaging results is critical to patient care but difficult to accomplish efficiently. To improve communication at their institution, the authors introduced a radiology report categorization system (RADCAT) that organizes diagnostic imaging reports and uses automated communication systems. The study objectives were to (1) describe RADCAT’s design, (2) evaluate its implementation for appropriate imaging, and (3) evaluate the communication of important, nonurgent results with recommended follow-up.MethodsThis retrospective study was performed in a multihospital adult and pediatric tertiary referral academic health system. The intervention, a radiology report categorization system with five levels of acuity and IT-supported communication workflows, was globally implemented in November 2017. The primary outcomes were the successful implementation of RADCAT to appropriate diagnostic imaging reports and the successful communication of important, nonurgent results with recommended follow-up to ordering providers and patients by the radiology quality assurance team.ResultsOver 18 months after implementation, 740,625 radiology reports were categorized under the RADCAT system, with 42%, 28%, and 30% from the emergency department, inpatient, and outpatient settings, respectively. A random selection of 100 studies from the 23,718 total reports without RADCAT categorization identified 4 diagnostic radiology reports that erroneously lacked RADCAT grading. In 2019, of the 38,701 studies with nonurgent imaging follow-up recommendations, 38,692 (nearly 100.0%) were successfully communicated to providers or patients on the basis of quality assurance data.ConclusionsA comprehensive radiology report categorization system was successfully implemented across a multihospital adult and pediatric health system, demonstrating reliable communication of imaging results with recommendations for nonacute imaging follow-up.     

广东省医用X射线诊断应用频度调查

目的 了解广东省医用X射线诊断医疗照射频度水平，为放射诊断的合理应用提供参考依据。方法 采用分层典型抽样的方法，选取广东省广州市、惠州市、江门市、茂名市、梅州市、潮州市和肇庆市等7个地区的56家医疗机构进行X射线诊断医疗照射频度情况调查，用调查样本的相关变量（医院总人次数、门急诊量、住院人数、放射工作人员数、放射诊断设备数）做多重线性回归分析，将有相关性的自变量拟合线性回归方程，以此来估算广东省2016年普通X射线诊断检查、CT诊断检查频度和医用X射线诊断检查的总频度。结果 胸部摄影在普通X射线诊断检查中样本例数最多，占比为60.84%；颅脑检查在CT诊断检查中的样本例数最多，占比为28.03%；心血管介入在介入放射学检查中的样本例数最多，占比为48.83%；普通X射线诊断检查、CT诊断检查和介入放射学检查均以"40~"年龄组例数所占比例最高，占比分别为47.95%、65.41%和75.64%；各类型的医用X射线诊断检查均集中在三级医院和二级医院。以此调查结果估算广东省2016年普通X射线诊断检查频度为699次/千人口，CT诊断检查频度为293次/千人口。广东省2016年医用X射线诊断检查的总频度为992次/千人口。结论 此次频度估算的结果有一定的局限性，但以较少的投入完成了此次调查。调查结果显示，广东省医用X射线诊断的频度水平发展较快，三级医院和二级医院的医用X射线诊断检查类型较多，有关部门应有针对性地加强受检者所受医疗照射的放射防护，积极引导正确合理应用放射诊断，努力实现趋利避害。     

Diagnostic radiographers’ experience of COVID-19, Gauteng South Africa

IntroductionAs of July 2020, South Africa (SA) had the fifth highest number of COVID-19 infections in the world, with the greatest contributor of these infections, being the province of Gauteng. Diagnostic radiographers in Gauteng providing chest CT, chest radiograph and MRI services are frontline workers experiencing these unprecedented times. Therefore, this study undertook to explore diagnostic radiographers’ experiences of COVID-19.MethodsA qualitative approach using an asynchronous opened-ended online questionnaire was used to explore diagnostic radiographers’ experiences of COVID-19. Responses from purposively sampled diagnostic radiographers in Gauteng SA, underwent thematic analysis.ResultsSixty diagnostic radiographers representing both the private and public health sector responded to the questionnaire. Thematic analysis revealed three themes: new work flow and operations, effect on radiographer well-being and radiographer resilience.ConclusionBesides experiencing a shift in their professional work routine and home/family dynamics, diagnostic radiographers’ well-being has also been impacted by COVID-19. Adapting to the “new way of work” has been challenging yet their resilience and dedication to their profession, providing quality patient care and skill expertise is their arsenal to combat these challenges.Implications for practiceUnderstanding the impact of COVID-19 on diagnostic radiographers will allow radiology departments’ management, hospital management, professional bodies and educational institutions to re-evaluate provision of resources, training, employee wellness programs as well as policies and procedures.     

Initial Impact of COVID-19 on Radiology Practices: An ACR/RBMA Survey

PurposeThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic affected radiology practices in many ways. The aim of this survey was to estimate declines in imaging volumes and financial impact across different practice settings during April 2020.MethodsThe survey, comprising 48 questions, was conducted among members of the ACR and the Radiology Business Management Association during May 2020. Survey questions focused on practice demographics, volumes, financials, personnel and staff adjustments, and anticipation of recovery.ResultsDuring April 2020, nearly all radiology practices reported substantial (56.4%-63.7%) declines in imaging volumes, with outpatient imaging volumes most severely affected. Mean gross charges declined by 50.1% to 54.8% and collections declined by 46.4% to 53.9%. Percentage reductions did not correlate with practice size. The majority of respondents believed that volumes would recover but not entirely (62%-88%) and anticipated a short-term recovery, with a surge likely in the short term due to postponement of elective imaging (52%-64%). About 16% of respondents reported that radiologists in their practices tested positive for COVID-19. More than half (52.3%) reported that availability of personal protective equipment had become an issue or was inadequate. A majority (62.3%) reported that their practices had existing remote reading or teleradiology capabilities in place before the pandemic, and 22.3% developed such capabilities in response to the pandemic.ConclusionsRadiology practices across different settings experienced substantial declines in imaging volumes and collections during the initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in April 2020. Most are actively engaged in both short- and long-term operational adjustments.     

Characteristics of COVID-19 Community Practice Declines in Noninvasive Diagnostic Imaging Professional Work

PurposeThe operational and financial impact of the widespread coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) curtailment of imaging services on radiology practices is unknown. We aimed to characterize recent COVID-19-related community practice noninvasive diagnostic imaging professional work declines.MethodsUsing imaging metadata from nine community radiology practices across the United States between January 2019 and May 2020, we mapped work relative value unit (wRVU)-weighted stand-alone noninvasive diagnostic imaging service codes to both modality and body region. Weekly 2020 versus 2019 wRVU changes were analyzed by modality, body region, and site of service. Practice share χ² testing was performed.ResultsAggregate weekly wRVUs ranged from a high of 120,450 (February 2020) to a low of 55,188 (April 2020). During that −52% wRVU nadir, outpatient declines were greatest (−66%). All practices followed similar aggregate trends in the distribution of wRVUs between each 2020 versus 2019 week (P = .96-.98). As a percentage of total all-practice wRVUs, declines in CT (20,046 of 63,992; 31%) and radiography and fluoroscopy (19,196; 30%) were greatest. By body region, declines in abdomen and pelvis (16,203; 25%) and breast (12,032; 19%) imaging were greatest. Mammography (−17%) and abdominal and pelvic CT (−14%) accounted for the largest shares of total all-practice wRVU reductions. Across modality-region groups, declines were far greatest for mammography (−92%).ConclusionsSubstantial COVID-19-related diagnostic imaging work declines were similar across community practices and disproportionately impacted mammography. Decline patterns could facilitate pandemic second wave planning. Overall implications for practice workflows, practice finances, patient access, and payment policy are manifold.     

Beyond business as usual: Radiology residency educational response to the COVID-2019 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted standard hospital operations and diagnostic radiology resident education at academic medical centers across the country. Deferment of elective surgeries and procedures coupled with a shift of resources toward increased inpatient clinical needs for the care of COVID-19 patients has resulted in substantially decreased imaging examinations at many institutions. Additionally, both infection control and risk mitigation measures have resulted in minimal on-site staffing of both trainees and staff radiologists at many institutions. As a result, residents have been placed in nonstandard learning environments, including working from home, engaging in a virtual curriculum, and participating in training sessions in preparation for potential reassignment to other patient care settings. Typically, for residents to gain the necessary knowledge, skills, and experience to practice independently upon graduation, radiology training programs must provide an optimal balance between resident education and clinical obligations. We describe our experience adapting to the challenges in educational interruptions and clinical work reassignments of 41 interventional and diagnostic radiology residents at a large academic center. We highlight opportunities for collaboration and teamwork in creatively adjusting and planning for the short and long-term impact of the pandemic on resident education. This experience shows how the residency educational paradigm was shifted during a pandemic and can serve as a template to address future disruptions.     

Radiologist Reporting and Operational Management for Patients With Suspected COVID-19

PurposeThe aim of this study was to evaluate the adoption and outcomes of locally designed reporting guidelines for patients with possible coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsA departmental guideline was developed for radiologists that specified reporting terminology and required communication for patients with imaging findings suggestive of COVID-19, on the basis of patient test status and imaging indication. In this retrospective study, radiology reports completed from March 1, 2020, to May 3, 2020, that mentioned COVID-19 were reviewed. Reports were divided into patients with known COVID-19, patients with “suspected” COVID-19 (having an order indication of respiratory or infectious signs or symptoms), and “unsuspected patients” (other order indications, eg, trauma or non–chest pain). The primary outcome was the percentage of COVID-19 reports using recommended terminology; the secondary outcome was percentages of suspected and unsuspected patients diagnosed with COVID-19. Relationships between categorical variables were assessed using the Fisher exact test.ResultsAmong 77,400 total reports, 1,083 suggested COVID-19 on the basis of imaging findings; 774 of COVID-19 reports (71%) used recommended terminology. Of 574 patients without known COVID-19 at the time of interpretation, 345 (60%) were eventually diagnosed with COVID-19, including 61% (315 of 516) of suspected and 52% (30 of 58) of unsuspected patients. Nearly all unsuspected patients (46 of 58) were identified on CT.ConclusionsRadiologists rapidly adopted recommended reporting terminology for patients with suspected COVID-19. The majority of patients for whom radiologists raised concern for COVID-19 were subsequently diagnosed with the disease, including the majority of clinically unsuspected patients. Using unambiguous terminology and timely notification about previously unsuspected patients will become increasingly critical to facilitate COVID-19 testing and contact tracing as states begin to lift restrictions.     

Identifying Factors Important to Patients for Resuming Elective Imaging During the COVID-19 Pandemic

PurposeTo identify factors important to patients for their return to elective imaging during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.MethodsIn all, 249 patients had elective MRIs postponed from March 23, 2020, to April 24, 2020, because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Of these patients, 99 completed a 22-question survey about living arrangement and health care follow-up, effect of imaging postponement, safety of imaging, and factors important for elective imaging. Mann-Whitney U, Fisher’s exact, χ² tests, and logistic regression analyses were performed. Statistical significance was set to P ≤ .05 with Bonferroni correction applied.ResultsOverall, 68% of patients felt imaging postponement had no impact or a small impact on health, 68% felt it was fairly or extremely safe to obtain imaging, and 53% thought there was no difference in safety between hospital-based and outpatient locations. Patients who already had imaging performed or rescheduled were more likely to feel it was safe to get an MRI (odds ratio [OR] 3.267, P = .028) and that the hospital setting was safe (OR 3.976, P = .004). Staff friendliness was the most important factor related to an imaging center visit (95% fairly or extremely important). Use of masks by staff was the top infection prevention measure (94% fairly or extremely important). Likelihood of rescheduling imaging decreased if a short waiting time was important (OR = 0.107, P = .030).ConclusionAs patients begin to feel that it is safe to obtain imaging examinations during the COVID-19 pandemic, many factors important to their imaging experience can be considered by radiology practices when developing new strategies to conduct elective imaging.     

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Breast Imaging: An Analysis of the National Mammography Database

PurposeThe aim of this study was to quantify the initial decline and subsequent rebound in breast cancer screening metrics throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.MethodsScreening and diagnostic mammographic examinations, biopsies performed, and cancer diagnoses were extracted from the ACR National Mammography Database from March 1, 2019, through May 31, 2021. Patient (race and age) and facility (regional location, community type, and facility type) demographics were collected. Three time periods were used for analysis: pre-COVID-19 (March 1, 2019, to May 31, 2019), peak COVID-19 (March 1, 2020, to May 31, 2020), and COVID-19 recovery (March 1, 2021, to May 31, 2021). Analysis was performed at the facility level and overall between time periods.ResultsIn total, 5,633,783 screening mammographic studies, 1,282,374 diagnostic mammographic studies, 231,390 biopsies, and 69,657 cancer diagnoses were analyzed. All peak COVID-19 metrics were less than pre-COVID-19 volumes: 36.3% of pre-COVID-19 for screening mammography, 57.9% for diagnostic mammography, 47.3% for biopsies, and 48.7% for cancer diagnoses. There was some rebound during COVID-19 recovery as a percentage of pre-COVID-19 volumes: 85.3% of pre-COVID-19 for screening mammography, 97.8% for diagnostic mammography, 91.5% for biopsies, and 92.0% for cancer diagnoses. Across various metrics, there was a disproportionate negative impact on older women, Asian women, facilities in the Northeast, and facilities affiliated with academic medical centers.ConclusionsCOVID-19 had the greatest impact on screening mammography volumes, which have not returned to pre-COVID-19 levels. Cancer diagnoses declined significantly in the acute phase and have not fully rebounded, emphasizing the need to increase outreach efforts directed at specific patient population and facility types.     

河北省医疗照射应用频度调查

目的 了解河北省2016年放射诊疗机构基本情况和医疗照射应用频度。方法 采用普查的方式,以行政文件形式下发调查表格,了解河北省2016年医用X射线诊断、介入放射学、放射治疗、临床核医学的基本情况和诊疗人次。将调查的各类型放射诊疗人次数除以2016年全省常住人口数,得出不同放射诊疗类型的应用频度。结果 2016年全省有放射诊疗机构2 951家,放射诊疗设备6 966台,医用X射线诊断应用频度为379.25人次/千人口,介入放射学应用频度2.31人次/千人口,放射治疗应用频度0.55例/千人口,临床核医学应用频度1.65人次/千人口。CT应用频度136.39人次/千人口,占全省医用X射线诊断应用频度的36.0%,年均增长率达12.4%。各地各类医疗照射应用频度中,临床核医学应用频度最高的石家庄是最低的衡水的11倍;三级医疗机构虽然只占机构总数的2.3%,但其开展25.5%的医用X射线诊断和35.3%的CT检查,开展介入放射学和放射治疗超过了全省的70%,临床核医学更是高达全省的97.7%。结论 初步掌握了河北省2016年放射诊疗机构基本情况和医疗照射应用频度,医疗照射将保持较长时间的增长趋势且各地各级医疗机构开展情况很不平衡,要加强宏观调控和医疗照射防护管理力度,合理应用各种放射诊疗,保护患者和受检者健康和安全,促进放射诊疗事业健康可持续发展。     

Point of care and intensive care lung ultrasound: A reference guide for practitioners during COVID-19

ObjectivesCurrent events with the recent COVID-19 outbreak are necessitating steep learning curves for the NHS workforce. Ultrasound, although not used in the diagnosis of COVID-19 may be utilised by practitioners at the point of care (POC) or on the intensive care units (ITUs) where rapid assessment of the lung condition may be required. The aim of this article was to review current literature surrounding the use of lung ultrasound in relation to COVID-19 and provide Sonographers with a quick and digestible reference guide for lung pathologies.Key findingsUltrasound is being used in Italy and China to help review lung condition during the COVID-19 outbreak however not strictly as a diagnostic tool as Computed Tomography (CT) of the chest and chest radiographs are currently gold standard. Ultrasound is highly sensitive in the detection of multiple lung pathologies which can be demonstrated in conjunction with COVID-19 however to date there are no specific, nor pathognomonic findings which relate to COVID-19 on ultrasound.ConclusionLung ultrasound is highly sensitive and can quickly and accurately review lung condition creating potential to assess for changes or resolution over time, especially in the ITU and POC setting. However it should not be used as a diagnostic tool for COVID-19 due to low specificity in relation to the virus.Implications for practiceThe adoption of lung ultrasound to monitor lung condition during the COVID-19 outbreak may reduce the need for serial exposure to ionising radiation on the wards and in turn reduce the number of radiographers required to attend infected wards and bays, protecting both patients and the workforce.     

Creating a Radiology Call Center Hotline and “HOT” Sites: Centralizing Radiology Questions and Cohorting Out-patient Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic

IntroductionAmidst COVID-19 crisis, confusion exists over current radiology operations due to influx of new data and new protocols. In order to decrease confusion and reduce imaging facility related COVID-19 transmissions, we created a dedicated radiology COVID-19 call center and dedicated out-patient COVID-19 imaging sites (referred to “HOT” sites).Materials and MethodsWe created a central radiology call center hotline, staffed by our radiology technologists, to answer all radiology questions related to COVID-19 and help with scheduling exams. All out-patient x-ray exams became mandatory to schedule through the call center so proper COVID-19 screening could occur. If positive for COVID-19 symptoms, they are sent to “HOT” sites. Various statistical analyses were performed.ResultsA total of 2548 calls were received over 7 weeks with linear increase in calls during this period (R 2 = 0.17, P = 0.003). Most common reasons for calling were related to scheduling (n = 2336, 92%) and radiology operations (n = 145, 6%). At our main “HOT” site, from a total of 371 separate patient encounters by date of study, 72 patient encounters (19%) were COVID-19 positive at time of exam.DiscussionThis project provides efficient and reassuring radiology operations during an emergency situation by providing a single reliable point of contact and a source of truth for all facets of radiology. In doing so, we facilitate high quality patient centered care while protecting the health of our patients and staff.