Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Nucl Med Commun ; 42(2): 138-149, 2021 Feb 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33346606

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: COVID-19 brought about unprecedented challenges to healthcare, with nuclear medicine (NM) being no exception. The British Nuclear Medicine Society (BNMS) COVID-19 survey assessed the impact of the first wave of pandemic on NM services in the UK. With COVID-19 resurge compounded by seasonal winter pressures, we reflect and share lessons learnt from the first wave of pandemic to guide future strategy. METHODS: A questionnaire consisting of 34 questions was sent out to all BNMS members over 2 weeks in May 2020, to evaluate the impact of 'lockdown'. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-eight members (92 sites) from a multidisciplinary background responded. There was a 65% reduction across all services; 97.6% of respondents reported some reduction in diagnostic procedures and 71.3% reduction in therapies; 85% worked with a reduced workforce. The North East of England, Greater London and South East and Wessex were most affected by staff absences. The North East reported the highest number of COVID-19 positive staff; London reported the greatest lack of testing. The reported time required to clear the backlog was 1-12 months. Seventy-one percent of participants used BNMS COVID-19 guidance. CONCLUSION: The first wave caused a major disruption of NM service delivery and impacted on the workforce. The departmental strategies should tailor services to evolving local and regional differences in prevalence of COVID-19. A blanket shutdown of services with a 'one size fits all' strategy would likely have a severe impact on future delivery of NM and health services in general. Timely testing of staff and patients remains of paramount importance.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Nuclear Medicine/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Personal Protective Equipment/supply & distribution , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Workforce/statistics & numerical data
2.
Nucl Med Commun ; 41(7): 636-650, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32427698

ABSTRACT

AIM: A recent audit has highlighted that there is a large variation in the way gastric emptying scintigraphy is performed, analysed and reported in the UK. In this study, we have established a comprehensive protocol on how to perform gastric emptying including normal ranges for two of the most widely used meals. A standardized scrambled egg sandwich was used as the main meal. Normal ranges were also established for oat porridge as an alternative gluten-free meal. We have calculated normal ranges for several functional parameters which may be used to assess gastric emptying. We hope that establishing a reliable normal range for these two simple and commonly used meals will encourage adoption of a universally accepted protocol for measurement of solid gastric emptying in the UK. METHOD: A total of 42 volunteers (20 male, 22 female, age range 22-68) with no history of gastrointestinal symptoms or diabetes were studied. Each volunteer fasted overnight and consumed two meals with similar nutritional composition on two separate days: scrambled eggs with two slices of bread were consumed on one day and gluten-free porridge (40 g in 200 mL whole milk) was consumed on a different day. Each meal was radiolabelled with 10 MBq of Tc-DTPA. Simultaneous anterior-posterior 2-min static images were acquired with the patient standing between the gamma camera detectors. Images were acquired every 5 min over a 2 hour period, followed by a single image at 3 hour. The data were modelled using a power-exponential function that allowed measurements of gastric emptying functional parameters including lag time, half-emptying time (HET), peak emptying rate, time-to-peak emptying (TPE) and exponential half-life (EHL). Three-hour retention was also calculated. Paired t-tests were used to compare the two meals and two-sample t-tests were used to assess gender-related differences. Regression analysis was used to assess correlation of the functional parameters with age and body habitus (body surface area, BSA). RESULTS: All gastric emptying functional parameters were significantly different between the two meals (P < 0.001). The normal range for lag time was 0-13 min for porridge and 1-34 min for scrambled egg. The normal range for HET was 18-73 min for porridge and 44-116 min for scrambled egg. The normal range for EHL was 21-57 min for porridge and 20-82 min for scrambled egg. The normal range for 3 hour retention was <7% for porridge and <17% for scrambled egg. Only weak significance was found for gender-related differences in gastric function for the two meals (0.05 < P < 0.10). Weak correlation was also observed for some functional parameters when plotted against age and BSA (0.05 < P < 0.10). CONCLUSION: We have established gastric emptying normal ranges for the two most commonly used meals in the UK. The normal ranges are meal specific and not interchangeable, with porridge showing significantly faster transit than scrambled egg for all measured parameters. Scrambled egg sandwich is the recommended meal for solid gastric emptying studies as it is more reproducible and more comparable to a normally consumed solid meal for our population. Porridge would be a suitable alternative for patients who are unable to eat egg sandwiches, for example, patients with egg allergy or gluten intolerance.


Subject(s)
Gastric Emptying , Radionuclide Imaging/standards , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Reference Values , Time Factors , United Kingdom , Young Adult
3.
Nucl Med Commun ; 41(6): 499-504, 2020 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32304491

ABSTRACT

This guidance document is a brief consensus document covering the range and breadth of nuclear medicine practice in the UK, and identifies a few steps individual nuclear medicine practitioners and departments can take in the best interests of their patients. This guidance document should be used to inform local practice and does not replace local Trust policies or any relevant legislation. At all times, the best interests of the patients should be paramount. Please read this guidance in conjunction with previous editorial (COVID-19- Nuclear Medicine Departments, be prepared! by Huang HL, Allie R, Gnanasegaran G, Bomanji. J Nucl Med Commun 2020; 41:297-299). Although some aspects of this guidance are time-sensitive due to the nature of the global emergency, we believe that there is still sufficient information to provide some key guiding principles.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Nuclear Medicine , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Diagnostic Imaging , Hand Hygiene , Hospital Departments , Humans , National Health Programs , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Radiopharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , United Kingdom
4.
Nucl Med Commun ; 36(7): 758-9, 2015 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26020608
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...