Dayne Magnuson RT(R)(QM), Presenter: Nothing to Disclose

Alisa Ingrid Walz-Flannigan PhD, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

Beth A. Schueler PhD, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

Timothy R. Daly RT(R)(QM), Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

Ben Babcock PhD, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

We used data collected from our clinical practice to assess the workflow efficiency of different types of radiographic rooms. Our data shows that DR is more efficient than CR for some exams but exam time savings were not substantial. Also for auxiliary views use of a wireless DR detector did not significantly improve efficiency over CR.

There are many options for radiographic room configurations which can include computed radiography (CR) and fixed digital flat-panel radiography (DR) systems. Determination of the optimal configuration requires a cost-benefit analysis which includes: upfront cost, workflow efficiency, patient dose and image quality. While DR systems are generally higher in upfront costs than CR, many vendors promise greater workflow efficiency. It is relevant for a facility to assess all factors for a given radiographic system, including the workflow efficiency.  

We studied radiographic room workflow efficiency (based on exam times) for different equipment types including: CR, mixed DR/CR and DR-only. The CR rooms used multi-plate readers for increased efficiency. The mixed DR/CR rooms used fixed DR detectors for table and wall-stand views and a single-plate CR reader for auxiliary views. The DR-only room used the same fixed DR detectors but with a wireless DR detector for auxiliary views. 14 common radiographic exams in an adult outpatient clinic were extracted from our radiology information system for a total of 9,316 exams.

DR rooms (DR-only or mixed DR/CR) were found to have statistically-significant shorter exam times than CR-only systems for 6 out of 14 examinations analyzed. For these exams, the average time savings was 20%. No significant difference in efficiency was found between CR-only and DR rooms for the remaining exams. Also, comparing mixed DR/CR and DR-only exams, no significant difference in exam time was found. This may be attributable to a number of factors, including: CR-only rooms were efficiently designed (with multi-plate readers in each room) Patient and technologist influence on exam time may dominate all other factors The DR detectors sometimes require a pause to reduce latent image artifact in high exposure views

Magnuson, D, Walz-Flannigan, A, Schueler, B, Daly, T, Babcock, B, Workflow Analysis for a Digital Radiographic Practice.  Radiological Society of North America 2011 Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting, November 26 - December 2, 2011 ,Chicago IL. http://archive.rsna.org/2011/11005645.html