PET/CT Imaging: Maximum Utilization at Lowest Time Consumption
Positron emission tomography (PET) and computed tomography (CT) combination is the most recent medical imaging technique that uses small quantities of a radioactive tracer called flurodeoxyglucose (FDG18F), to produce images showing how our body is functioning. Different professional experts are engaged to perform the sophisticated PET/CT imaging system and take considerable time. The work is dedicated to optimize the use of whole PET/CT imaging system to minimize the time consumption from patients profile registration to CT study. Data from 1January to 31 January 2014 and from 1 July to 31 July 2014 were recorded, represented as 1st month and 2nd month respectively, measuring the time required by every step of the patient’s pathway. The data of the first month acquisition shows that, five patients were examined through this arrangement in a single day. By reducing patient turnover time and consequently the device downtime, patient turnover time dropped from 5 minutes to only 3 minutes while device downtime devolved from 90 minutes to 70 minutes between the first month and the second month data acquisition. Hence the number of daily performed examinations increased by two. Continuous activity control allow the identification of critical organizational and structural issues; provide us useful information to the optimization in the use of expensive and sophisticated PET/CT devices with a clear value in public health, great benefits for the patients and improved management results.
Barrington S.F, Maisey M.N, and Wahl R.L, (2006), An Atlas of Clinical Positron Emission Tomography, London: Arnold, p1-30.
Das. C, Kumar R., Balakrishnan, Vijay B., Chawla M. and Malhotra A., (2008), Clin. Nucl. Med., 33 (35), p359-361.
Akhurst T, Downey R.J, Ginsberg M.S, Gonen M, Bains M, Korst R, Ginsberg R.J, Rusch V.W and Larson S.M., (2002), Ann Thorac Sur. 73: p259 -264
Carolyn N. and Edmund K., (2001), J Nucl. Med., 42 (9), p1368-1374.
Parker D.J. et al, (1996), Meas. Sci. Tech. 7.
Harkirat S, Anand S.S, Indrajit I.K, and Das A.K, (2008), Indian J. Rad. Imag., 18 (2), p141- 147.
Tarantola G, Zito F, and Gerundini P, (2003), J. Nucl. Med., 44, p756-796.
Orlacchio A, Ciarrapico A.M, Schillaci O, Guazzaroni M, Volpi1 T, Danieli R, Simonetti G, (2012), Open Journal of Radiology, 2, p105-109. doi.org/10.4236/ojrad.2012.24018
Buck A.K, Herrmann K, Stargardt T, Dechow T, Krause B.J, and Schreyögg J, (2010), Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 51 (3), p401-412. doi:10.2967/jnumed.108.059584
Saif M.W, Tzannou I, Makrilia N, and Syrigos K, (2010), Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, 83 (2), p53-65.
Juweid M.E, and Cheson B.D, (2006), The New England Journal of Medicine, 354 (5), p496-507. doi:10.1056/NEJMra050276
Orlacchio A, Schillaci O, Gaspari E, Della Gatta F, Danieli R, Bolacchi F, Ragano C, Caracciolo, Mancini A, and Simonetti G, (2012), La Radiologia Medica, 117 (7), p1250-1263. doi:10.1007/s11547-012-0792-8.
Conti P.S, Keppler J.S, and. Halls J.M, (1994), American Journal of Roentgenology, 162 (6), p1279-1286.
Keppler J.S, and Conti P.S, (2001), American Journal of Roentgenology, 177(1), p31-40.
Krug B, Pirson A.S, Crott R, and Vander B.T, (2007), European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 34 (5), p625-657. doi:10.1007/s00259-006-0308-y
Halliday S and Thrall J.H, (2005), American Journal of Roentgenology, 184 (5), p152-155.
- There are currently no refbacks.