Evaluating head CT referral quality and appropriateness in an Italian emergency department: a monocentric retrospective study.

IF 4.5 2区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Marco Parillo, Milena Calabrese, Anna Maria Careddu, Antonio Alessandro Pallottino, Carlo Cosimo Quattrocchi
{"title":"Evaluating head CT referral quality and appropriateness in an Italian emergency department: a monocentric retrospective study.","authors":"Marco Parillo, Milena Calabrese, Anna Maria Careddu, Antonio Alessandro Pallottino, Carlo Cosimo Quattrocchi","doi":"10.1186/s13244-025-02042-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To analyze the quality and appropriateness of head CT referrals from the emergency department (ED) of a single hospital in Italy.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A quality care study was designed to retrospectively identify consecutive head CT referrals generated from the ED of a tertiary hospital between January 1 and April 30, 2022. Referral quality was assessed using the Reason for Exam Imaging Reporting and Data System (RI-RADS), while referral appropriateness was evaluated according to the American College of Radiology (ACR) criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 2908 imaging requests, of which 620 (21%) were adequate (RI-RADS A or B) and 2288 (79%) were inadequate (RI-RADS C or D) in terms of quality. In 410 cases, it was not possible to evaluate the appropriateness of the requests according to the ACR guidelines due to the lack of clinical data. Among the 2498 evaluable requests, 25% were classified as usually not appropriate. Of the requests with RI-RADS A or B, 84% were appropriate. Conversely, among the evaluable requests with RI-RADS C or D, the percentage of appropriate requests dropped to 70%. Of all patients with inappropriate requests, 98% did not suffer from acute cerebral diseases according to imaging, with headache and syncope being the primary clinical indications. Analysis of positivity rates revealed a significant difference between appropriate and inappropriate CT scans (11% vs 1%; p-value < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The recent increase in head CT scan requests in the ED is not completely justified and could be mitigated by improving the quality and appropriateness of referrals.</p><p><strong>Critical relevance statement: </strong>Excessive head CT requests in the ED cause needless radiation, pollution, and costs. Integrating guidelines and prospective justification with clear documentation in patient records, along with improved staff training and a no-blame culture, are key to reducing unnecessary imaging.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>RI-RADS scores the quality, while the ACR criteria assess the appropriateness of imaging referrals. Most ED head CT requests lacked quality (especially lacking a specific diagnostic question) and were often clinically inappropriate. Appropriate head CT indication strongly predicted finding acute cerebral pathology on imaging.</p>","PeriodicalId":13639,"journal":{"name":"Insights into Imaging","volume":"16 1","pages":"185"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12381342/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Insights into Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-025-02042-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To analyze the quality and appropriateness of head CT referrals from the emergency department (ED) of a single hospital in Italy.

Materials and methods: A quality care study was designed to retrospectively identify consecutive head CT referrals generated from the ED of a tertiary hospital between January 1 and April 30, 2022. Referral quality was assessed using the Reason for Exam Imaging Reporting and Data System (RI-RADS), while referral appropriateness was evaluated according to the American College of Radiology (ACR) criteria.

Results: We included 2908 imaging requests, of which 620 (21%) were adequate (RI-RADS A or B) and 2288 (79%) were inadequate (RI-RADS C or D) in terms of quality. In 410 cases, it was not possible to evaluate the appropriateness of the requests according to the ACR guidelines due to the lack of clinical data. Among the 2498 evaluable requests, 25% were classified as usually not appropriate. Of the requests with RI-RADS A or B, 84% were appropriate. Conversely, among the evaluable requests with RI-RADS C or D, the percentage of appropriate requests dropped to 70%. Of all patients with inappropriate requests, 98% did not suffer from acute cerebral diseases according to imaging, with headache and syncope being the primary clinical indications. Analysis of positivity rates revealed a significant difference between appropriate and inappropriate CT scans (11% vs 1%; p-value < 0.001).

Conclusion: The recent increase in head CT scan requests in the ED is not completely justified and could be mitigated by improving the quality and appropriateness of referrals.

Critical relevance statement: Excessive head CT requests in the ED cause needless radiation, pollution, and costs. Integrating guidelines and prospective justification with clear documentation in patient records, along with improved staff training and a no-blame culture, are key to reducing unnecessary imaging.

Key points: RI-RADS scores the quality, while the ACR criteria assess the appropriateness of imaging referrals. Most ED head CT requests lacked quality (especially lacking a specific diagnostic question) and were often clinically inappropriate. Appropriate head CT indication strongly predicted finding acute cerebral pathology on imaging.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

评估意大利急诊科头部CT转诊的质量和适宜性:一项单中心回顾性研究。
目的:分析意大利某医院急诊科(ED)头部CT转诊的质量和适宜性。材料和方法:一项质量护理研究旨在回顾性识别2022年1月1日至4月30日期间某三级医院急诊科产生的连续头部CT转诊。转诊质量采用检查影像报告和数据系统(RI-RADS)进行评估,而转诊适宜性根据美国放射学会(ACR)标准进行评估。结果:我们纳入了2908个成像请求,其中620个(21%)在质量方面是足够的(RI-RADS A或B), 2288个(79%)在质量方面是不充分的(RI-RADS C或D)。在410个病例中,由于缺乏临床数据,无法根据ACR指南评估请求的适当性。在2498个可评估的请求中,25%被归类为通常不合适。在RI-RADS为A或B的请求中,84%是适当的。相反,在RI-RADS C或D的可评估请求中,适当请求的百分比下降到70%。在所有不适当要求的患者中,98%的患者从影像学上看没有急性脑疾病,头痛和晕厥是主要的临床指征。结论:近期急诊科头部CT扫描请求的增加并不是完全合理的,可以通过提高转诊的质量和适当性来缓解。关键相关性声明:急诊科过度的头部CT要求会导致不必要的辐射、污染和费用。将指导方针和前瞻性理由与患者记录中的明确文件结合起来,以及改进的工作人员培训和无责任文化,是减少不必要成像的关键。重点:RI-RADS评分质量,而ACR标准评估影像学转诊的适当性。大多数急诊科头部CT要求缺乏质量(特别是缺乏一个具体的诊断问题),通常在临床上不合适。适当的头部CT征象对影像学发现急性脑病变有很强的预测作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Insights into Imaging
Insights into Imaging Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
4.30%
发文量
182
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Insights into Imaging (I³) is a peer-reviewed open access journal published under the brand SpringerOpen. All content published in the journal is freely available online to anyone, anywhere! I³ continuously updates scientific knowledge and progress in best-practice standards in radiology through the publication of original articles and state-of-the-art reviews and opinions, along with recommendations and statements from the leading radiological societies in Europe. Founded by the European Society of Radiology (ESR), I³ creates a platform for educational material, guidelines and recommendations, and a forum for topics of controversy. A balanced combination of review articles, original papers, short communications from European radiological congresses and information on society matters makes I³ an indispensable source for current information in this field. I³ is owned by the ESR, however authors retain copyright to their article according to the Creative Commons Attribution License (see Copyright and License Agreement). All articles can be read, redistributed and reused for free, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly. The open access fees (article-processing charges) for this journal are kindly sponsored by ESR for all Members. The journal went open access in 2012, which means that all articles published since then are freely available online.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信