Congress:
EuroSafe Imaging 2020
Keywords:
Multicentre study, Observational, Retrospective, Patterns of Care, Screening, CT, Radiation physics, Lung, Action 2 - Clinical diagnostic reference levels (DRLs)
Authors:
M. B. Chatfield, D. Golden, D. Gress, M. Simanowith, J. Burleson
DOI:
10.26044/esi2020/ESI-14402
Conclusion and recommendations
The distributions of dose indices are remarkably similar across different data collection methods, suggesting that for properly specified exams, non-DICOM (potentially manual) data capture is as reliable as DICOM capture for estimating DRLs.
The analysis presented here is in early stages. Further refinements are necessary to examine outliers, explore variations in sub-populations, and compare the results by patient size. The DIR collects patient size in the form of localizer images used to calculate effective diameter; the LCSR collects patient height and weight which supports calculation of body mass index. Our analysis will need to reconcile the different measure of patient size.
The study is limited in that participation in these registries, while widespread, is voluntary. As a result, both data sources are somewhat limited in their ability to be representative of all studies performed in the country.