The use of CT for screening: A national survey of radiologists' activities and attitudes

Radiology

Volumn 248, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 160-168

  Burger, Ingrid M ^a,e   Kass, Nancy E ^a,b   Sunshine, Jonathan H ^c   Siegelman, Stanley S ^d  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c American College of Radiology   (United States)

^d JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL   (United States)

^e NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; CANCER SCREENING; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW; LUNG CANCER; MALE; MEDICAL SOCIETY; MOTIVATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; RADIOLOGIST; SCREENING TEST; SELF CONCEPT; UNITED STATES; WHOLE BODY CT; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CLINICAL PRACTICE; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; MASS SCREENING; PHYSICIAN; RADIOLOGY; STATISTICS;

ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; MASS SCREENING; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; PHYSICIANS; RADIOLOGY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; UNITED STATES;

EID: 47249113357     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2481071369     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Morrison A. Screening in chronic disease. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1992.
2. Black WC, Welch HG. Screening for disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997;168:3-11.
3. Kopans DB, Monsees B, Feig SA. Screening for cancer: when is it valid? - lessons from the mammography experience. Radiology 2003;229:319-327.
4. Illes J, Fan E, Koenig BA, Raffin TA, Kann D, Atlas SW. Self-referred whole-body CT imaging: current implications for health care consumers. Radiology 2003;228:346-351.
5. Kalish GM, Bhargavan M, Sunshine JH, Forman HP. Self-referred whole-body imaging: where are we now? Radiology 2004;233:353-358.
6. Lee TH, Brennan TA. Direct-to-consumer marketing of high-technology screening tests. N Engl J Med 2002;346:529-531.
7. Hillman BJ. CT screening: who benefits and who pays. Radiology 2003;228:26-28.
8. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Cancer screening recommendations. http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/uspstfix.htm. Accessed November 2004.
9. American College of Radiology. Position statement on full-body CT screening. http://www.acr.org. Accessed December 2004.
10. Illes J, Kann D, Karetsky K, et al. Advertising, patient decision making, and self-referral for computed tomographic and magnetic resonance imaging. Arch Intern Med 2004;164:2415-2419.
11. Brenner DJ, Elliston CD. Estimated radiation risks potentially associated with full-body CT screening. Radiology 2004;232:735-738.
12. Stanley RJ. Inherent dangers in radiologic screening. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;177:989-992.
13. Hunink MG, Gazelle GS. CT screening: a trade-off of risks, benefits, and costs. J Clin Invest 2003;111:1612-1619.
14. Fenton JJ, Deyo RA. Patient self-referral for radiologic screening tests: clinical and ethical concerns. J Am Board Fam Pract 2003;16:494-501.
15. Welch HG. Should I be tested for cancer? maybe not and here's why. Berkeley, Calif: University of California Press, 2004.
16. Brant-Zawadzki M. CT screening: why I do it. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179:319-326.
17. Brant-Zawadzki MN. Screening on demand: potent of a revolution in medicine. Diagn Imaging (San Franc) 2000;22:25-27.
18. Henschke CI, Yankelevitz DF, Libby DM, Pasmantier MW, Smith JP, Miettinen OS. Survival of patients with stage I lung cancer detected on CT screening. N Engl J Med 2006;355:1763-1771.
19. Kolata G. Rapid rise and fall for body-scanning clinics. New York Times. January 23, 2005.
20. Sunshine JH, Lewis RS, Bhargavan M. A portrait of interventional radiologists in the United States. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005;185:1103-1112.
21. Bhargavan M, Sunshine JH. Workload of radiologists in the United States in 2002-2003 and trends since 1991-1992. Radiology 2005;236:920-931.
22. O'Rourke RA, Brundage BH, Froelicher VF, et al. American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Expert Consensus document on electron-beam computed tomography for the diagnosis and prognosis of coronary artery disease. Circulation 2000;102:126-140.
23. Greenland P, LaBree L, Azen SP, Doherty TM, Detrano RC. Coronary artery calcium score combined with Framingham score for risk prediction in asymptomatic individuals. JAMA 2004;291:210-215.
24. Greenland P, Bonow RO, Brundage BH, et al. ACCF/AHA 2007 clinical expert consensus document on coronary artery calcium scoring by computed tomography in global cardiovascular risk assessment and in evaluation of patients with chest pain: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Clinical Expert Consensus Task Force. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:378-402.
25. Hartman TE, Swensen SJ. CT screening for lung cancer. Semin Roentgenol 2005;40:193-196.
26. Swensen SJ, Jett JR, Hartman TE, et al. CT screening for lung cancer: 5-year prospective experience. Radiology 2005;235:259-265.
27. Black C, Bagust A, Boland A, et al. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of computed tomography screening for lung cancer: systematic reviews. Health Technol Assess 2006;10:iii-iv, ix-x, 1-90.
28. National Cancer Institute National Lung Screening Trial. http://www.cancer.gov/nlst. Accessed November 2007.
29. Ganti AK, Mulshine JL. Lung cancer screening. Oncologist 2006;11:481-487.
30. Strauss GM, Dominioni L, Jett JR, Freedman M, Grannis FW Jr. Como international conference position statement: lung cancer screening for early diagnosis 5 years after the 1998 Varese conference. Chest 2005;127:1146-1151.
31. Furtado CD, Aguirre DA, Sirlin CB, et al. Whole-body CT screening: spectrum of findings and recommendations in 1192 patients. Radiology 2005;237:385-394.
32. Beinfeld MT, Wittenberg E, Gazelle GS. Cost-effectiveness of whole-body CT screening. Radiology 2005;234:415-422.
33. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Whole body scanning using computed tomography. http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/ct/. Accessed August 2002.
34. Council on Scientific Affairs, American Medical Association. Featured report: commercialized medical screening (A-03). http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/ pub/category/13628.html. Accessed July 2003.
35. Hall FM, Casola G, Sirlin CB, Furtado CD, Aguirre DA, Brown MA. Callback and follow-up guidelines for whole-body CT screening. Radiology 2006;241:627-629.
36. Iglehart JK. The new era of medical imaging: progress and pitfalls. N Engl J Med 2006;354:2822-2828.