| Title |
Opportunities for improvement on current nuclear cardiology practices and radiation exposure in Latin America: Findings from the 65-country IAEA Nuclear Cardiology Protocols cross-sectional Study (INCAPS)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12350-016-0433-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
João V. Vitola, Fernando Mut, Erick Alexánderson, Thomas N.B. Pascual, Mathew Mercuri, Ganesan Karthikeyan, Nathan Better, Madan M. Rehani, Ravi Kashyap, Maurizio Dondi, Diana Paez, Andrew J. Einstein, The INCAPS Investigators Group |
| Abstract |
Comparison of Latin American (LA) nuclear cardiology (NC) practice with that in the rest of the world (RoW) will identify areas for improvement and lead to educational activities to reduce radiation exposure from NC. INCAPS collected data on all SPECT and PET procedures performed during a single week in March-April 2013 in 36 laboratories in 10 LA countries (n = 1139), and 272 laboratories in 55 countries in RoW (n = 6772). Eight "best practices" were identified a priori and a radiation-related Quality Index (QI) was devised indicating the number used. Mean radiation effective dose (ED) in LA was higher than in RoW (11.8 vs 9.1 mSv, p < 0.001). Within a populous country like Brazil, a wide variation in laboratory mean ED was found, ranging from 8.4 to 17.8 mSv. Only 11% of LA laboratories achieved median ED <9 mSv, compared to 32% in RoW (p < 0.001). QIs ranged from 2 in a laboratory in Mexico to 7 in a laboratory in Cuba. Three major opportunities to reduce ED for LA patients were identified: (1) more laboratories could implement stress-only imaging, (2) camera-based methods of ED reduction, including prone imaging, could be more frequently used, and (3) injected activity of (99m)Tc could be adjusted reflecting patient weight/habitus. On average, radiation dose from NC is higher in LA compared to RoW, with median laboratory ED <9 mSv achieved only one third as frequently as in RoW. Opportunities to reduce radiation exposure in LA have been identified and guideline-based recommendations made to optimize protocols and adhere to the "as low as reasonably achievable" (ALARA) principle. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 50% |
| Mexico | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 48 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 13% |
| Professor | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 33% |
| Unknown | 12 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 40% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Philosophy | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 17% |
| Unknown | 13 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 February 2016.
All research outputs
#16,722,190
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#1,225
of 2,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,409
of 312,983 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#28
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,044 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,983 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.