Addressing requests for emergency ultrasonographic examinations when implementing teleradiology services

1Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Purpose: To prospectively assess how to address requests for ultrasonographic examinations when setting up an on-call teleradiology service. Materials and methods: An analytical prospective study was performed from January 2012 to December 2012 inclusively. All requests received for after-hours ultrasonographic examinations during this period were analyzed. Ultrasound requests were classified as being postponable until working hours, replaceable by an alternate cross-sectional imaging modality, or urgent and needing to be performed after hours. Results: A total of 176 requests for ultrasonographic examinations were analyzed. They predominantly included requests for abdominal and pelvic ultrasonographic examinations (63%). Thirty-nine requests (22.2%) were considered as postponable, 49 (27.8%) as replaceable and 64 (36.4%) as both postponable and replaceable. Twenty-four requests (13.6%) were considered as urgent; they consisted of 10 requests for venous duplex Doppler ultrasonographic examinations of the lower limbs, eight requests for testicular ultrasonographic examinations, five for pelvic ultrasonographic examinations and one for soft-tissue ultrasonographic examination. In these urgent cases, realistic options were either to transfer the patient to another institution or to train emergency department physicians in ultrasonography for local handling. Conclusion: Although the need for addressing requests for ultrasonographic examinations should be taken into account when setting up an on-call teleradiology service, it should not impede such plans.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Junca-Laplace-Valageas, C., Gervaise, A., Pernin, M., Naulet, P., Portron, Y., & Lapierre-Combes, M. (2015). Addressing requests for emergency ultrasonographic examinations when implementing teleradiology services. Diagnostic and Interventional Imaging, 96(11), 1141–1146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2015.01.007

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free