Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

CT pulmonary angiography versus ventilation-perfusion scintigraphy in pregnancy: implications from a UK survey of doctors' knowledge of radiation exposure.
Radiology. 2006 Sep; 240(3):765-70.R

Abstract

PURPOSE

To prospectively investigate the fetal dosimetry knowledge of health care professionals involved in the management of pulmonary embolism.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred sixty-one health care professionals consented to participate in this study, which had ethical board approval. The individuals surveyed were from 14 hospitals (seven university and seven community hospitals) in the United Kingdom, and 68 trainees were included. These health care professionals included 102 radiologists, 13 nuclear physicians, seven dual-accredited radiologist-nuclear medicine physicians, 16 medical physicists, and 23 pulmonologists. The interview included eight questions. Two questions asked which examination-computed tomographic (CT) pulmonary angiography or ventilation-perfusion (V/Q) scintigraphy-gave (a) the larger radiation exposure (effective dose) to an adult and (b) the larger fetal dose. Two questions assessed the magnitude of the dose differences between these two tests. Four questions asked for an estimate of the dose to both adult and fetus from CT pulmonary angiography and scintigraphy. Subgroup analysis was performed by using the Fisher exact test.

RESULTS

Of the 161 professionals surveyed, 93 (58%) appreciated correctly that V/Q scintigraphy delivers a higher fetal dose than does CT pulmonary angiography. Three of 161 professionals were able to answer all eight questions correctly. In terms of the knowledge that V/Q scintigraphy has a higher fetal dose than does CT, there was no statistically significant difference in correct answers between specialties (P > .05), between university and community hospitals (P = .13), or between attending physicians and residents (P = .52).

CONCLUSION

This survey reveals that there is a lack of knowledge of fetal dosimetry in the imaging of pregnant women suspected of having pulmonary embolism.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Institute of Nuclear Medicine, University College London, Middlesex Hospital, Mortimer St, London W1T 3AA, United Kingdom. drashleygroves@hotmail.comNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

16926327

Citation

Groves, Ashley M., et al. "CT Pulmonary Angiography Versus Ventilation-perfusion Scintigraphy in Pregnancy: Implications From a UK Survey of Doctors' Knowledge of Radiation Exposure." Radiology, vol. 240, no. 3, 2006, pp. 765-70.
Groves AM, Yates SJ, Win T, et al. CT pulmonary angiography versus ventilation-perfusion scintigraphy in pregnancy: implications from a UK survey of doctors' knowledge of radiation exposure. Radiology. 2006;240(3):765-70.
Groves, A. M., Yates, S. J., Win, T., Kayani, I., Gallagher, F. A., Syed, R., Bomanji, J., & Ell, P. J. (2006). CT pulmonary angiography versus ventilation-perfusion scintigraphy in pregnancy: implications from a UK survey of doctors' knowledge of radiation exposure. Radiology, 240(3), 765-70.
Groves AM, et al. CT Pulmonary Angiography Versus Ventilation-perfusion Scintigraphy in Pregnancy: Implications From a UK Survey of Doctors' Knowledge of Radiation Exposure. Radiology. 2006;240(3):765-70. PubMed PMID: 16926327.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - CT pulmonary angiography versus ventilation-perfusion scintigraphy in pregnancy: implications from a UK survey of doctors' knowledge of radiation exposure. AU - Groves,Ashley M, AU - Yates,Stuart J, AU - Win,Thida, AU - Kayani,Irfan, AU - Gallagher,Ferdia A, AU - Syed,Rizwan, AU - Bomanji,Jamshed, AU - Ell,Peter J, PY - 2006/8/24/pubmed PY - 2006/9/30/medline PY - 2006/8/24/entrez SP - 765 EP - 70 JF - Radiology JO - Radiology VL - 240 IS - 3 N2 - PURPOSE: To prospectively investigate the fetal dosimetry knowledge of health care professionals involved in the management of pulmonary embolism. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred sixty-one health care professionals consented to participate in this study, which had ethical board approval. The individuals surveyed were from 14 hospitals (seven university and seven community hospitals) in the United Kingdom, and 68 trainees were included. These health care professionals included 102 radiologists, 13 nuclear physicians, seven dual-accredited radiologist-nuclear medicine physicians, 16 medical physicists, and 23 pulmonologists. The interview included eight questions. Two questions asked which examination-computed tomographic (CT) pulmonary angiography or ventilation-perfusion (V/Q) scintigraphy-gave (a) the larger radiation exposure (effective dose) to an adult and (b) the larger fetal dose. Two questions assessed the magnitude of the dose differences between these two tests. Four questions asked for an estimate of the dose to both adult and fetus from CT pulmonary angiography and scintigraphy. Subgroup analysis was performed by using the Fisher exact test. RESULTS: Of the 161 professionals surveyed, 93 (58%) appreciated correctly that V/Q scintigraphy delivers a higher fetal dose than does CT pulmonary angiography. Three of 161 professionals were able to answer all eight questions correctly. In terms of the knowledge that V/Q scintigraphy has a higher fetal dose than does CT, there was no statistically significant difference in correct answers between specialties (P > .05), between university and community hospitals (P = .13), or between attending physicians and residents (P = .52). CONCLUSION: This survey reveals that there is a lack of knowledge of fetal dosimetry in the imaging of pregnant women suspected of having pulmonary embolism. SN - 0033-8419 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/16926327/CT_pulmonary_angiography_versus_ventilation_perfusion_scintigraphy_in_pregnancy:_implications_from_a_UK_survey_of_doctors'_knowledge_of_radiation_exposure_ L2 - http://pubs.rsna.org/doi/10.1148/radiol.2403050910?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub=pubmed DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -