Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8kt4b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-07T09:01:58.377Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of technological developments on nuclear medicine technologist productivity: A systematic review

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2009

Edwina Adams ,
Jennifer Cox ,
Deborah Schofield  and
Barbara Adamson
Edwina Adams
Affiliation:
The University of Sydney
Jennifer Cox
Affiliation:
The University of Sydney
Deborah Schofield
Affiliation:
The University of Sydney
Barbara Adamson
Affiliation:
The University of Sydney
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: Nuclear medicine has changed rapidly as a result of technological developments. Very little is reported on the effects these developments may have on technologist productivity. This study aims to determine whether advances have created a workplace where more patient studies can be performed with fewer technologists. The level of change in automation or time taken to perform a routine task by the nuclear medicine technologist as a result of technological development over the past decade is reported.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted using Embase.com, Medline, INSPEC, and Cinahl. Two authors reviewed each article for eligibility. Technological developments in routine areas over the past decade were reviewed. The resultant automation or time effects on data acquisition, data processing, and image processing were summarized.

Results: Sixteen articles were included in the areas of myocardial perfusion, information technology, and positron emission tomography (PET). Gamma camera design has halved the acquisition time for myocardial perfusion studies, automated analysis requires little manual intervention and information technologies and filmless departments are more efficient. Developments in PET have reduced acquisition to almost one-fifth of the time.

Conclusions: Substantial efficiencies have occurred over the decade thereby increasing productivity, but whether staffing levels are appropriate for safe, high quality practice is unclear. Future staffing adequacy is of concern given the anticipated increasing service needs.

Keywords

Nuclear medicineGamma cameraPositron emission tomographyNuclear medicine technologist
Type
General Essays
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 25 , Issue 3 , July 2009 , pp. 383 - 390
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Abidov, A, Germano, G, Hachamovitch, R, Berman, DS. Gated SPECT in assessment of regional and global left ventricular function: Major tool of modern nuclear imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2006;13:261–279.Google Scholar
2. Achtert, AD, King, MA, Dahlberg, ST, et al. An investigation of the estimation of ejection fractions and cardiac volumes by a quantitative gated SPECT software package in simulated gated SPECT images. J Nucl Cardiol. 1998;5:144–152.Google Scholar
3. Adams, E, Cox, J, Adamson, B, Schofield, D. A profile of Australian nuclear medicine technologist practice. Nucl Med Commun. 2008;29:83–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Adams, E, Schofield, D, Cox, J, Adamson, B. Will the Australian nuclear medicine technologist workforce meet anticipated health care demands? Aust Health Rev. 2008;32:282–291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5. Alessio, AM, Kinahan, PE, Cheng, PM, Vesselle, H, Karp, JS. PET/CT scanner instrumentation, challenges, and solutions. Radiol Clin North Am. 2004;42:1017–1032.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2006 census data. http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/D3310114.nsf/Home/Census+Data (accessed May 2008).Google Scholar
7. Australian Government Department of Employment and Workplace Relations. Australian jobs update January 2005. http://www.workplace.gov.au/workplace/Individual/Migrant/AustralianLabourMarketUpdate.htm (accessed May 2008).Google Scholar
8. Australian Government Department of Employment and Workplace Relations. National Skills Shortage List, Jan 2004. http://amwac.health.nsw.gov.au/ (accessed May 2008).Google Scholar
9. Australian Government Productivity Commission. 2005 Impact of advances in medical technology in Australia. http://www.pc.gov.au/projects/study/medicaltechnology/docs/finalreport/mediarelease (accessed May 2008).Google Scholar
10. Bettinardi, V, Mancosu, P, Danna, M, et al. Two-dimensional vs three-dimensional imaging in whole body oncologic PET/CT: A Discovery-STE phantom and patient study. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;51:214–223.Google Scholar
11. Bucerius, J, Joe, AY, Lindstaedt, I, et al. Single- vs. dual-head SPECT for detection of myocardial ischemia and viability in a large study population. Clin Imaging. 2007;31:228–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Burbridge, B, Bell, C. The digital readiness of imaging facilities in Saskatchewan. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2004;55:311–314.Google Scholar
13. Chowdhury, FU, Scarsbrook, AF. The role of hybrid SPECT-CT in oncology: Current and emerging clinical applications. Clin Radiol. 2008;63:241–251.Google Scholar
14. Chua, T, Yin, LC, Thiang, TH, et al. Accuracy of the automated assessment of left ventricular function with gated perfusion SPECT in the presence of perfusion defects and left ventricular dysfunction: Correlation with equilibrium radionuclide ventriculography and echocardiography. J Nucl Cardiol. 2000;7:301–311.Google Scholar
15. Doi, K. Diagnostic imaging over the last 50 years: Research and development in medical imaging science and technology. Phys Med Biol. 2006;51:R5-R27.Google Scholar
16. Donahue, K. Radiologic technologists: Alienation and deskilling in a “high technology: Profession. Santa Barbara: University of California; 1995:231.Google Scholar
17. Dwyer, SJ, Templeton, AW, Martin, NL, et al. Cost of managing digital diagnostic images for a 614-bed hospital. J Digit Imaging. 2002;15:255–260.Google Scholar
18. Everaert, H, Vanhove, C, Lahoutte, T, et al. Optimal dose of F-18-FDG required for whole-body PET using an LSO PET camera. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30:1615–1619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. Faber, TL, Cooke, CD, Folks, RD, et al. Left ventricular function and perfusion from gated SPECT perfusion images: An integrated method. J Nucl Med. 1999;40:650–659.Google ScholarPubMed
20. Freeman, MR, Konstantinou, C, Barr, A, Greyson, ND. Clinical comparison of 180-degree and 360-degree data collection of technetium 99m sestamibi SPECT for detection of coronary artery disease. J Nucl Cardiol. 1998;5:14–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21. Germano, G. Technical aspects of myocardial SPECT imaging. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:1499–1507.Google ScholarPubMed
22. Germano, G, Kavanagh, PB, Berman, DS. An automatic approach to the analysis, quantitation and review of perfusion and function from myocardial perfusion SPECT images. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 1997;13:337–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23. Halpern, BS, Dahlbom, M, Quon, A, et al. Impact of patient weight and emission scan duration on PET/CT image quality and lesion detectability. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:797–801.Google ScholarPubMed
24. Hanwell, L, Conway, J. New staff utilization survey. American Healthcare Radiology Administrators Radiology Management. 1996. https://www.ahraonline.org/RM/RMResults.asp (accessed January 2009).Google Scholar
25. Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences. Health technology assessment of positron emission tomography (PET)—a systematic review. Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences. 2001. www.ices.on.ca (accessed July 2008).Google Scholar
26. Khalil, MM, Elgazzar, A, Khalil, W. Evaluation of left ventricular ejection fraction by the quantitative algorithms QGS, ECTb, LMC and LVGTF using gated myocardial perfusion SPECT: Investigation of relative accuracy. Nucl Med Commun. 2006;27:321–332.Google Scholar
27. Lin, GS, Hines, HH, Grant, G, Taylor, K, Ryals, C. Automated quantification of myocardial ischemia and wall motion defects by use of cardiac SPECT polar mapping and 4-dimensional surface rendering. J Nucl Med Technol. 2006;34:3–17.Google ScholarPubMed
28. Lodge, MA, Badawi, RD, Gilbert, R, Dibos, PE, Line, BR. Comparison of 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional acquisition for F-18-FDG PET oncology studies performed on an LSO-based scanner. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:23–31.Google Scholar
29. Lopes, MI, Chepel, V. Detectors for medical radioisotope imaging: Demands and perspectives. Radiat Phys Chem. 2004;71:683–692.Google Scholar
30. Matsumoto, K, Kitamura, K, Mizuta, T, et al. Performance characteristics of a new 3-dimensional continuous-emission and spiral-transmission high-sensitivity and high-resolution PET camera evaluated with the NEMA NU 2–2001 standard. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:83–90.Google Scholar
31. Medicare Australia. Medical benefit schedule. https://www.medicareaustralia.gov.au/statistics/mbs_item.shtml (accessed May 2008).Google Scholar
32. Muehllehner, G, Karp, JS. Positron emission tomography. Phys Med Biol. 2006;51:R117–R137.Google Scholar
33. O'Connor, MK, Leong, LK, Gibbons, RJ. Assessment of infarct size and severity by quantitative myocardial SPECT: Results from a multicenter study using a cardiac phantom. J Nucl Med. 2000;41:1383–1390.Google ScholarPubMed
34. Paul, AK, Tatsumi, M, Fujino, K, Hashikawa, K, Nishimura, T. Feasibility of a short acquisition protocol for whole-body positron emission tomography with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2001;28:1697–1701.Google Scholar
35. Perkins, AC, Gordon, I, Read, J, Ellis, B. Training of staff for the delivery of PET/CT services in the UK. Nucl Med Commun. 2006;27:1005–1010.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
36. Reiner, B, Siegel, E, Carrino, JA. Workflow optimization: Current trends and future directions. J Digit Imaging. 2002;15:141–152.Google Scholar
37. Reiner, B, Siegel, E, Scanlon, M. Changes in technologist productivity with implementation of an enterprisewide PACS. J Digit Imaging. 2002;15:22–26.Google Scholar
38. Sarikaya, I, Sarikaya, A, Holder, LE. The role of single photon emission computed tomography in bone imaging. Semin Nucl Med. 2001;31:3–16.Google Scholar
39. Scott, A, Rowe, C, Allman, K, et al. Australian Prospective multi-centre PET data collection project–Impact of FDG PET in oncology, epilepsy and cardiac patients. J Nucl Med. 2007;48 (Suppl 2):185P.Google Scholar
40. Seierstad, T, Stranden, E, Bjering, K, et al. Doses to nuclear technicians in a dedicated PET/CT centre utilising 18F fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG). Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2007;123:246–249.Google Scholar
41. Shaw, A. Shortage of imaging technologists threatens healthcare, experts say. Canadian Healthcare Technology; 2003. http://www.canhealth.com/oct03.html#anchor192108 (accessed November 2008).Google Scholar
42. Skillman, S, Holly, C, Andrilla, A et al. , Washington State hospitals: Results of 2003/04 workforce survey. http://www.healthcarepersonnel.org/publications.htm (accessed November 2008).Google Scholar
43. Slomka, PJ, Fieno, D, Thomson, L, et al. Automatic detection and size quantification of infarcts by myocardial perfusion SPECT: Clinical validation by delayed-enhancement MRI. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:728–735.Google Scholar
44. Strobel, K, Rudy, M, Treyer, V, et al. Objective and subjective comparison of standard 2-D and fully 3-D reconstructed data on a PET/CT system. Nucl Med Commun. 2007;28:555–559.Google Scholar
45. Tarantola, G, Zito, F, Gerundini, P. PET instrumentation and reconstruction algorithms in whole-body applications. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:756–769.Google Scholar
46. The Center for Health Workforce Studies School of Public Health University at Albany. Nuclear medicine technologists in the U.S., findings from a 2005 survey. 2006. http://interactive.snm.org/docs/Nuclear_Medicine_Technologist_Report_2005.pdf (accessed November 2006).Google Scholar
47. Townsend, DW. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Semin Nucl Med. 2008;38:152–166.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
48. Townsend, DW, Beyer, T, Blodgett, TM. PET/CT scanners: A hardware approach to image fusion. Semin Nucl Med. 2003;33:193–204.Google Scholar
49. United States Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics. Occupational outlook handbook, 2008–09 edition. Nuclear medicine technologists. http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos104.htm (accessed December 2008).Google Scholar
50. University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences. UAMS study shows health care workforce shortages in Arkansas will double by 2008. http://www.uams.edu/today/2003/061203/workforceshortage.htm (accessed January 2009).Google Scholar
51. Vaccari, G, Saccavini, C. Radiology informatics and work flow redesign. PsychNology J. 2006;4:87–101.Google Scholar
52. Visvikis, D, Griffiths, D, Costa, DC, Bomanji, J, Ell, PJ. Clinical evaluation of 2D versus 3D whole-body PET image quality using a dedicated BGO PET scanner. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005;32:1050–1056.Google Scholar
53. Wolak, A, Slomka, PJ, Fish, MB, et al. Quantitative myocardial-perfusion SPECT: Comparison of three state-of-the-art software packages. J Nucl Cardiol. 2008;15 (1):27–34.Google Scholar
54. Yoshimura, H, Inoue, Y, Tanaka, H, et al. Operating data and unsolved problems of the DICOM modality worklist: An indispensable tool in an electronic archiving environment. Radiat Med. 2003;21:68–73.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Adams Supplementary Material

Tables.doc

Download Adams Supplementary Material(File)
File 118.8 KB