Cargando…
Implementation and evaluation of a protocol management system for automated review of CT protocols
Protocol review is important to decrease the risk of patient injury and increase the consistency of CT image quality. A large volume of CT protocols makes manual review labor‐intensive, error‐prone, and costly. To address these challenges, we have developed a software system for automatically managi...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5874106/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27685112 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v17i5.6164 |
_version_ | 1783310105772556288 |
---|---|
author | Grimes, Joshua Leng, Shuai Zhang, Yi Vrieze, Thomas McCollough, Cynthia |
author_facet | Grimes, Joshua Leng, Shuai Zhang, Yi Vrieze, Thomas McCollough, Cynthia |
author_sort | Grimes, Joshua |
collection | PubMed |
description | Protocol review is important to decrease the risk of patient injury and increase the consistency of CT image quality. A large volume of CT protocols makes manual review labor‐intensive, error‐prone, and costly. To address these challenges, we have developed a software system for automatically managing and monitoring CT protocols on a frequent basis. This article describes our experiences in the implementation and evaluation of this protocol monitoring system. In particular, we discuss various strategies for addressing each of the steps in our protocol‐monitoring workflow, which are: maintaining an accurate set of master protocols, retrieving protocols from the scanners, comparing scanner protocols to master protocols, reviewing flagged differences between the scanner and master protocols, and updating the scanner and/or master protocols. In our initial evaluation focusing only on abdomen and pelvis protocols, we detected 309 modified protocols in a 24‐week trial period. About one‐quarter of these modified protocols were determined to contain inappropriate (i.e., erroneous) protocol parameter modifications that needed to be corrected on the scanner. The most frequently affected parameter was the series description, which was inappropriately modified 47 times. Two inappropriate modifications were made to the tube current, which is particularly important to flag as this parameter impacts both radiation dose and image quality. The CT protocol changes detected in this work provide strong motivation for the use of an automated CT protocol quality control system to ensure protocol accuracy and consistency. PACS number(s): 87.57.Q‐ |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5874106 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-58741062018-04-02 Implementation and evaluation of a protocol management system for automated review of CT protocols Grimes, Joshua Leng, Shuai Zhang, Yi Vrieze, Thomas McCollough, Cynthia J Appl Clin Med Phys Management and Profession Protocol review is important to decrease the risk of patient injury and increase the consistency of CT image quality. A large volume of CT protocols makes manual review labor‐intensive, error‐prone, and costly. To address these challenges, we have developed a software system for automatically managing and monitoring CT protocols on a frequent basis. This article describes our experiences in the implementation and evaluation of this protocol monitoring system. In particular, we discuss various strategies for addressing each of the steps in our protocol‐monitoring workflow, which are: maintaining an accurate set of master protocols, retrieving protocols from the scanners, comparing scanner protocols to master protocols, reviewing flagged differences between the scanner and master protocols, and updating the scanner and/or master protocols. In our initial evaluation focusing only on abdomen and pelvis protocols, we detected 309 modified protocols in a 24‐week trial period. About one‐quarter of these modified protocols were determined to contain inappropriate (i.e., erroneous) protocol parameter modifications that needed to be corrected on the scanner. The most frequently affected parameter was the series description, which was inappropriately modified 47 times. Two inappropriate modifications were made to the tube current, which is particularly important to flag as this parameter impacts both radiation dose and image quality. The CT protocol changes detected in this work provide strong motivation for the use of an automated CT protocol quality control system to ensure protocol accuracy and consistency. PACS number(s): 87.57.Q‐ John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-09-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5874106/ /pubmed/27685112 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v17i5.6164 Text en © 2016 The Authors. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Management and Profession Grimes, Joshua Leng, Shuai Zhang, Yi Vrieze, Thomas McCollough, Cynthia Implementation and evaluation of a protocol management system for automated review of CT protocols |
title | Implementation and evaluation of a protocol management system for automated review of CT protocols |
title_full | Implementation and evaluation of a protocol management system for automated review of CT protocols |
title_fullStr | Implementation and evaluation of a protocol management system for automated review of CT protocols |
title_full_unstemmed | Implementation and evaluation of a protocol management system for automated review of CT protocols |
title_short | Implementation and evaluation of a protocol management system for automated review of CT protocols |
title_sort | implementation and evaluation of a protocol management system for automated review of ct protocols |
topic | Management and Profession |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5874106/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27685112 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v17i5.6164 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT grimesjoshua implementationandevaluationofaprotocolmanagementsystemforautomatedreviewofctprotocols AT lengshuai implementationandevaluationofaprotocolmanagementsystemforautomatedreviewofctprotocols AT zhangyi implementationandevaluationofaprotocolmanagementsystemforautomatedreviewofctprotocols AT vriezethomas implementationandevaluationofaprotocolmanagementsystemforautomatedreviewofctprotocols AT mccolloughcynthia implementationandevaluationofaprotocolmanagementsystemforautomatedreviewofctprotocols |