Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add filters








Language
Year range
1.
Biomedical Imaging and Intervention Journal ; : 1-3, 2010.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-625699

ABSTRACT

When x-rays were first discovered, the harmful effects of radiation had to be manifest in the early users before they were known. Today, radiation protection and safety have been established and the effects of radiation, as well as its risks, are known. Even so, medical radiation, in particular the growth in the use of computed tomography (CT), has resulted in soaring radiation doses received by the population in general. Inappropriate use has resulted in overuse, overdose and, perhaps, overdiagnosis, especially when used in screening. In the quest to control and curb the use of procedures involving radiation, however, we must be careful not to provoke a pandemic of irrational fear of radiation. Overreaction to the overuse and overdose of radiation might deter patients from life-saving procedures.

2.
Biomedical Imaging and Intervention Journal ; : 1-5, 2008.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-625817

ABSTRACT

To date, the College of Radiology (CoR) does not see any clear benefit in performing whole body screening computed tomography (CT) examinations in healthy asymptomatic individuals. There are radiation risk issues in CT and principles of screening should be adhered to. There may be a role for targeted cardiac screening CT that derives calcium score, especially for asymptomatic medium-risk individuals and CT colonography when used as part of a strategic programme for colorectal cancer screening in those 50 years and older. However, population based screening CT examinations may become appropriate when evidence emerges regarding a clear benefit for the patient outweighing the associated radiation risks.

3.
Biomedical Imaging and Intervention Journal ; : 1-4, 2008.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-625815

ABSTRACT

Convention dictates that standards are a necessity rather than a luxury. Standards are supposed to improve the exchange of health and image data information resulting in improved quality and efficiency of patient care. True standardisation is some time away yet, as barriers exist with evolving equipment, storage formats and even the standards themselves. The explosive growth in the size and complexity of images such as those generated by multislice computed tomography have driven the need for digital image management, created problems of storage space and costs, and created a challenge for increasing or getting an adequate speed for transmitting, accessing and retrieving the image data. The search for a suitable and practical format for storing the data without loss of information and medico-legal implications has become a necessity and a matter of ‘urgency’. Existing standards are either open or proprietary and must comply with local, regional or national laws. Currently there are the Picture Archiving and Communications System (PACS); Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM); Health Level 7 (HL7) and Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise (IHE). Issues in digital image management can be categorised as operational, procedural, technical and administrative. Standards must stay focussed on the ultimate goal – that is, improved patient care worldwide.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL