Pediatric Radiology

, 38:664 | Cite as

CT utilization: the emergency department perspective

  • Joshua Seth BroderEmail author


CT scan utilization in the pediatric emergency department (ED) has dramatically increased in recent years. This likely reflects the improved diagnostic capability of CT, as well as its wider availability. However, the utility of CT is tempered by the high radiation exposure to patients as well as cost. In this review we will consider the magnitude of changes in CT use in the pediatric ED, and we will examine some of the driving forces behind these increases. In addition, we will consider strategies to limit growth in CT scan utilization or even result in reductions in CT use in the future. These strategies include better physician and patient education, application of existing clinical decision rules to reduce CT utilization and development of new rules, technical alterations in CT protocols to reduce per-exam exposures, use of alternative imaging modalities such as US and MRI that do not expose patients to ionizing radiation, and expanded use of clinical observation in place of immediate diagnostic imaging. Reform of liability laws might alleviate another driving force behind high CT utilization rates. Protocols must be designed to maximize patient safety by limiting radiation exposures while preserving rapid and accurate diagnosis of time-sensitive conditions.


CT utilization Radiation Emergency Pediatric 


  1. 1.
    Broder J, Fordham LA, Warshauer DM (2007) Increasing utilization of computed tomography in the pediatric emergency department, 2000–2006. Emerg Radiol 14:227–232PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tanabe P, Travers D, Gilboy N et al (2005) Refining emergency severity index triage criteria. Acad Emerg Med 12:497–501PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tanabe P, Gilboy N, Travers DA (2007) Emergency Severity Index version 4: clarifying common questions. J Emerg Nurs 33:182–185PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tanabe P, Gimbel R, Yarnold PR et al (2004) The emergency severity index (version 3) 5-level triage system scores predict ED resource consumption. J Emerg Nurs 30:22–29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tanabe P, Gimbel R, Yarnold PR et al (2004) Reliability and validity of scores on the emergency severity index version 3. Acad Emerg Med 11:59–65PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Salim A, Sangthong B, Martin M et al (2006) Whole body imaging in blunt multisystem trauma patients without obvious signs of injury: results of a prospective study. Arch Surg 141:468–473 discussion 473–475PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brenner D, Elliston C, Hall E et al (2001) Estimated risks of radiation-induced fatal cancer from pediatric CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 176:289–296PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lee CI, Haims AH, Monico EP et al (2004) Diagnostic CT scans: assessment of patient, physician, and radiologist awareness of radiation dose and possible risks. Radiology 231:393–398PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brenner DJ, Hall EJ (2007) Computed tomography—an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 357:2277–2284PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Marchione M (2007) Study: CT scans raise cancer risk. Study warns millions needlessly getting dangerous radiation from CT scans, raising cancer risk. Newsweek, Nov. 29Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Otero HJ, Ondategui-Parra S, Erturk SM et al (2008) Imaging utilization in the management of appendicitis and its impact on hospital charges. Emerg Radiol 15:23–28PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Partrick DA, Janik JE, Janik JS et al (2003) Increased CT scan utilization does not improve the diagnostic accuracy of appendicitis in children. J Pediatr Surg 38:659–662PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stiell IG, Bennett C (2007) Implementation of clinical decision rules in the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med 14:955–959PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Perry JJ, Stiell IG (2006) Impact of clinical decision rules on clinical care of traumatic injuries to the foot and ankle, knee, cervical spine, and head. Injury 37:1157–1165PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Brehaut JC, Stiell IG, Graham ID (2006) Will a new clinical decision rule be widely used? The case of the Canadian c-spine rule. Acad Emerg Med 13:413–420PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Brehaut JC, Stiell IG, Visentin L et al (2005) Clinical decision rules “in the real world”: how a widely disseminated rule is used in everyday practice. Acad Emerg Med 12:948–956PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    McKay R, Shepherd J (2007) The use of the clinical scoring system by Alvarado in the decision to perform computed tomography for acute appendicitis in the ED. Am J Emerg Med 25:489–493PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kharbanda AB, Taylor GA, Fishman SJ et al (2005) A clinical decision rule to identify children at low risk for appendicitis. Pediatrics 116:709–716PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sun BC, Hoffman JR, Mower WR (2007) Evaluation of a modified prediction instrument to identify significant pediatric intracranial injury after blunt head trauma. Ann Emerg Med 49:325–332PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stiell IG, Greenberg GH, McKnight RD et al (1992) A study to develop clinical decision rules for the use of radiography in acute ankle injuries. Ann Emerg Med 21:384–390PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Viccellio P, Simon H, Pressman BD et al (2001) A prospective multicenter study of cervical spine injury in children. Pediatrics 108:E20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kline JA, Runyon MS, Webb WB et al (2006) Prospective study of the diagnostic accuracy of the simplify D-dimer assay for pulmonary embolism in emergency department patients. Chest 129:1417–1423PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Okamoto T, Sano K, Ogasahara K (2006) Receiver-operating characteristic analysis of leukocyte counts and serum C-reactive protein levels in children with advanced appendicitis. Surg Today 36:515–518PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mohammed AA, Daghman NA, Aboud SM et al (2004) The diagnostic value of C-reactive protein, white blood cell count and neutrophil percentage in childhood appendicitis. Saudi Med J 25:1212–1215PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Institute of Medicine (2006) IOM report: the future of emergency care in the United States health system. Acad Emerg Med 13:1081–1085PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hostetler MA, Mace S, Brown K et al (2007) Emergency department overcrowding and children. Pediatr Emerg Care 23:507–515PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Weiss SJ, Ernst AA, Sills MR et al (2007) Development of a novel measure of overcrowding in a pediatric emergency department. Pediatr Emerg Care 23:641–645PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Olshaker JS, Rathlev NK (2006) Emergency department overcrowding and ambulance diversion: the impact and potential solutions of extended boarding of admitted patients in the emergency department. J Emerg Med 30:351–356PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Richardson DB (2006) Increase in patient mortality at 10 days associated with emergency department overcrowding. Med J Aust 184:213–216PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Livingston DH, Lavery RF, Passannante MR et al (1998) Admission or observation is not necessary after a negative abdominal computed tomographic scan in patients with suspected blunt abdominal trauma: results of a prospective, multi-institutional trial. J Trauma 44:273–280 discussion 280–282PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Smita Awasthi SG, Holmes J (2007) Is hospitalization necessary in children with blunt abdominal trauma and a normal abdominal CT? Acad Emerg Med 14:S60–S61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Donnelly LF, Emery KH, Brody AS et al (2001) Minimizing radiation dose for pediatric body applications of single-detector helical CT: strategies at a large children’s hospital. AJR Am J Roentgenol 176:303–306PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Donnelly LF (2005) Reducing radiation dose associated with pediatric CT by decreasing unnecessary examinations. AJR 184:655–657PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Kofler JM Jr (2006) CT dose reduction and dose management tools: overview of available options. Radiographics 26:503–512PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Fefferman NR, Roche KJ, Pinkney LP et al (2001) Suspected appendicitis in children: focused CT technique for evaluation. Radiology 220:691–695PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gamanagatti S, Vashisht S, Kapoor A et al (2007) Comparison of graded compression ultrasonography and unenhanced spiral computed tomography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Singap Med J 48:80–87Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Broder J, Bowen J, Lohr J et al (2007) Cumulative CT exposures in emergency department patients evaluated for suspected renal colic. J Emerg Med 33:161–168PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lee SI, Saokar A, Dreyer KJ et al (2007) Does radiologist recommendation for follow-up with the same imaging modality contribute substantially to high-cost imaging volume? Radiology 242:857–864PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Blaivas M, Lyon M (2007) Frequency of radiology self-referral in abdominal computed tomographic scans and the implied cost. Am J Emerg Med 25:396–399PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Riddell AM, Khalili K (2006) Assessment of acute abdominal pain: utility of a second cross-sectional imaging examination. Radiology 238:570–577PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Gunderman R, Ambrosius WT, Cohen M (2000) Radiology reporting in an academic children’s hospital: what referring physicians think. Pediatr Radiol 30:307–314PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Doria AS, Amernic H, Dick P et al (2005) Cost-effectiveness analysis of weekday and weeknight or weekend shifts for assessment of appendicitis. Pediatr Radiol 35:1186–1195PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Selbst SM, Friedman MJ, Singh SB (2005) Epidemiology and etiology of malpractice lawsuits involving children in U.S. emergency departments and urgent care centers. Pediatr Emerg Care 21:165–169PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Emergency MedicineDuke University Medical CenterDurhamUSA

Personalised recommendations