Back

A Decade of Radiological Examinations in the Emergency Department: A Monocentric Retrospective Observational Study

Goumballa, N.; de OLIVEIRA, F.; COISY, F.; Goupil, J.; Frandon, J.; Longueville, F.; Daladouire, C.; Grandpierre, R. G.; Beregi, J. P.

2024-12-05 emergency medicine
10.1101/2024.12.04.24318507 medRxiv
Show abstract

PurposeTo analyze the evolution of various radiological examinations requested for patients admitted to the emergency department (ED) of a University Hospital. Materials and MethodsWe analyzed data on MRI, CT scan, Ultrasound (US), and X-ray activities, along with ED patient admissions over a ten-year period from 2014 to 2023. The patient data for each modality, categorized by age and sex, were extracted from the Radiological Information System database. ResultsThe number of patients undergoing radiological examinations increased from 35,532 in 2014 to 44,592 in 2023, marking a 25.9% increase, while the number of ED admissions rose from 71,776 to 103,456, a 44.1% increase. The ratio of radiological examinations to ED admissions decreased from 49.5% in 2014 to 43.1% in 2023. Over the study period, the number of patients receiving MRI and CT scans increased by 80.4% and 105.8%, respectively. The number of patients undergoing ultrasound remained relatively stable, with 2,616 in 2014 and 2,432 in 2023. In contrast, the number of X-ray patients decreased by 33.1% from 22,236 in 2014 to 14,847 in 2020 but rebounded to 20,492 in 2023. Male patients more frequently underwent CT (51.7%) and X-ray examinations (53.3%). ConclusionThis study highlights a significant increase in radiological activity within the emergency department, especially in CT scans and MRI usage over the ten-year period while ultrasound examinations stayed flat, accompanied by a decline in the ratio of radiological examinations to ED admissions.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.