Skip to main content

CT Practice Management

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Computed Tomography
  • 3017 Accesses

Abstract

Most imaging centers have more than one make and model of CT scanner in use across multiple locations within a hospital, city, or geographical region. These different scanners must fulfill identical imaging requests while often simultaneously realizing local site-specific exams. Many sites have in the hundreds of CT protocols to satisfy the hundreds of order sets a clinical diagnostic CT scanner receives. These clinical and logistical realities make CT protocol management challenging. This chapter defines this problem in more detail. We discuss strategies to address CT protocol management. We define a CT protocol from the perspective of clinical, compliance, workflow, and technical details. We discuss why we need a CT protocol optimization team and team membership. Lastly, we review solutions for documenting CT protocols and disseminating them to one’s CT scanner fleet.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Boland GW. Enhancing CT productivity: strategies for increasing capacity. Am J Roentgenol. 2008;191(1):3–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. ACR appropriateness criteria. American College of Radiology Web site. https://www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/ACR-Appropriateness-Criteria Accessed 23rd Jan 2019.

  3. Brunnquell CL, Avey GD, Szczykutowicz TP. Objective evaluation of CT time efficiency in acute stroke response. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018;15(6):876–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Szczykutowicz TP, Brunnquell CL, Avey GD, Bartels C, Belden DS, Bruce RJ, Field AS, Peppler WW, Wasmund P, Wendt G. A general framework for monitoring image acquisition workflow in the radiology environment: timeliness for acute stroke CT imaging. J Digit Imaging. 2018;31(2):201–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. AAPM CT Lexicon Version 1.3. AAPM Web site. https://www.aapm.org/pubs/CTProtocols/documents/CTTerminologyLexicon.pdf Accessed 23rd Jan 2019.

  6. TJC The Joint Commission Diagnostic Imaging Standards. https://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/18/AHC_DiagImagingRpt_MK_20150806.pdf. Retrieved 18th Jan 2019.

  7. Szczykutowicz TP, Pozniak M. A team approach for CT protocol optimization. J Assoc Med Imaging Manag Radiol Manag. 2016. Available at http://www.radiologymanagement-digital.com/radiologymanagement/11122016.

  8. Szczykutowicz TP, Rubert N, Belden D, Ciano A, Duplissis A, Hermanns A, Monette S, JanssenSaldivar E. A wiki based CT protocol management system. Radiol Manage. 2015;(6):25–9.

    Google Scholar 

  9. DICOM. DICOM Supplement 121: CT Protocol Storage. ftp://medical.nema.org/medical/dicom/final/sup121_ft.pdf Accessed 23rd Jan 2019.

  10. Szczykutowicz TP, Rubert N, Belden D, Ciano A, Duplissis A, Hermanns A, Monette S, Saldivar EJ. A wiki-based solution to managing your institution’s imaging protocols. J Am Coll Radiol. 2016;13(7):822–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Sachs PB, Hunt K, Mansoubi F, Borgstede J. CT and MR protocol standardization across a large health system: providing a consistent radiologist, patient, and referring provider experience. J Digit Imaging. 2017;30(1):11–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Cody DD, Fisher TS, Gress DA, Jr RRL, McNitt-Gray MF, Jr RJP, Fairobent LA. AAPM medical physics practice guideline 1. A: CT protocol management and review practice guideline. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2013;14(5):3–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Siegelman JRQW, Gress DA. Radiology stewardship and quality improvement: the process and costs of implementing a CT radiation dose optimization committee in a medium-sized community hospital system. J Am Coll Radiol. 2013;10(6):416–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kofler JM, Cody DD, Morin RL. CT protocol review and optimization. J Am Coll Radiol. 2014;11(3):267–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Trattner S, Pearson GD, Chin C, Cody DD, Gupta R, Hess CP, et al. Standardization and optimization of CT protocols to achieve low dose. J Am Coll Radiol. 2014;11(3):271–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Szczykutowicz TP, Bour RK, Pozniak M, Ranallo FN. Compliance with AAPM practice Guideline 1. a: CT protocol management and review—from the perspective of a university hospital. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2015;16(2):443–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Szczykutowicz TP, Bour RK, Rubert N, Wendt G, Pozniak M, Ranallo FN. CT protocol management: simplifying the process by using a master protocol concept. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2015c;16(4):228–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Zhang D, Savage CA, Li X, Liu B. Data-driven CT protocol review and management—experience from a large academic hospital. J Am Coll Radiol. 2015;12(3):267–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Grimes J, Leng S, Zhang Y, Vrieze T, McCollough C. Implementation and evaluation of a protocol management system for automated review of CT protocols. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2016;17(5):523–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. IHE Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise: Management of Acquisition Protocols (MAP). https://www.ihe.net/uploadedFiles/Documents/Radiology/IHE_RAD_Suppl_MAP.pdf. Retrieved 18th Jan 2019.

  21. Bohl M, Szczykutowicz T. A challenge to radiology and its professional associations: advocate for the implementation of IHE’s management of acquisition protocols (MAP) profile. Published in the Radiology Business Management Association (RBMA) Bulletin November–December 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Szczykutowicz TP, Siegelman J. On the same page—physicist and radiologist perspectives on protocol management and review. J Am Coll Radiol. 2015;12(8):808–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Szczykutowicz TP, Malkus A, Ciano A, Pozniak M. Tracking patterns of nonadherence to prescribed CT protocol parameters. J Am Coll Radiol. 2017;14(2):224–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Bae KT. Intravenous contrast medium administration and scan timing at CT: considerations and approaches. Radiology. 2010;256(1):32–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kalra MK, Saini S, Rubin GD, editors. MDCT: from protocols to practice. New York: Springer Science & Business Media; 2009. Chapter 2 by KT Bae.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Timothy P. Szczykutowicz .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Szczykutowicz, T.P. (2020). CT Practice Management. In: Samei, E., Pelc, N. (eds) Computed Tomography . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26957-9_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26957-9_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-26956-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-26957-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics