Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 263.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 263.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 263.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 263.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 263.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 263.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 263.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 263.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 296.79999999999995 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 296.79999999999995 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 296.79999999999995 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 296.79999999999995 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Radiol+Cardiothorac+Imaging 2020 ; 2 (6): e200420 Nephropedia Template TP
gab.com Text
Twit Text FOAVip
Twit Text #
English Wikipedia
Social Distancing with Portable Chest Radiographs During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Assessment of Radiograph Technique and Image Quality Obtained at 6 Feet and Through Glass #MMPMID33778645
Gange CP; Pahade JK; Cortopassi I; Bader AS; Bokhari J; Hoerner M; Thomas KM; Rubinowitz AN
Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging 2020[Dec]; 2 (6): e200420 PMID33778645show ga
PURPOSE: To develop a technique that allows portable chest radiography to be performed through the glass door of a patient's room in the emergency department. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of 100 radiographs (50 [mean age 59.4 +/- 17.3, range 22-87; 30 women] performed with the modified technique in April 2020, randomized with 50 [mean age 59 +/- 21.6, range 19-100; 31 men] using the standard technique was completed by three thoracic radiologists to assess image quality. Radiation exposure estimates to patient and staff were calculated. A survey was created and sent to 32 x-ray technologists to assess their perceptions of the modified technique. Unpaired Ttests were used for numerical data. A P value < .05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The entrance dose for a 50th percentile patient was the same between techniques, measuring 169 microGy. The measured technologist exposure from the modified technique assuming a 50th percentile patient and standing 6 feet to the side of the glass was 0.055 microGy, which was lower than standard technique technologist exposure of 0.088 microGy. Of the 100 portable chest radiographs evaluated by three reviewers, two reviewers rated all images as having diagnostic quality, while the other reviewer believed two of the standard images and one of the modified technique images were non-diagnostic. A total of 81% (26 of 32) of eligible technologists completed the survey. Results showed acceptance of the modified technique with the majority feeling safer and confirming conservation of PPE. Most technologists did not feel the modified technique was more difficult to perform. CONCLUSIONS: The studies acquired with the new technique remained diagnostic, patient radiation doses remained similar, and technologist dose exposure were decreased with modified positioning. Perceptions of the new modified technique by frontline staff were overwhelmingly positive.