Integrating Adverse Event Reporting Into a Free-Text Mobile Application Used in Daily Workflow Increases Adverse Event Reporting by Physicians.

© The Author(s) 2019. Adverse event (AE) reporting is a key component of patient safety and physicians are known to underreport. The authors hypothesized that integrating AE reporting into a mobile application used in daily physician workflow would increase physician reporting of AEs. After integrating AE reporting into a free-text mobile application used for daily workflow, the change in AE reporting by physicians was analyzed using Mann-Whitney U tests. AE reporting by physicians increased more than 37-fold (21 to 806; U = 7.5, P \u3c.0001). AE reporting by physicians as a proportion of all AE reports received increased 120-fold (from 0.1% to 12% of all reports, U = 10, P \u3c.0001). Integrating AE reporting into a free-text mobile application used in daily physician workflow markedly increased their reporting of AEs. This approach shifted time burden from physicians to quality officers. Implementation should be coupled with physician education about identifying AEs and content to include in reports

Comparing dose-length product⇓based and Monte Carlo simulation organ⇓based calculations of effective dose in 16- and 64-MDCT examinations using automatic tube current modulation

© American Roentgen Ray Society. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study is to compare dose-length product (DLP)-based calculation of effective dose (EDDLP) with Monte Carlo simulation organ-based calculation of effective dose (EDMCO) in 16- and 64-MDCT examinations, with the use of clinical examinations with automatic tube current modulation. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Dose data were obtained from 50 consecutive unenhanced head CT examinations, unenhanced chest CT examinations, and unenhanced and contrast-enhanced abdominopelvic CT examinations performed using 16- and 64-MDCT scanners, as well as from 50 pulmonary CT angiography (CTA) examinations performed using a 64-MDCT scanner and 31 pulmonary CTA examinations performed using a 16-MDCT scanner. The EDMCO and the mean patient effective diameter were calculated using commercially available software. The EDDLP was also calculated. Both the mean difference and percentage difference between EDDLP and EDMCO were calculated, and they were statistically compared according to patient sex, type of examination performed, and type of scanner used. RESULTS. EDDLP significantly underestimated the EDMCO by 0.3 mSv (19%) for men who underwent unenhanced head CT, 0.5 mSv (29%) for women who underwent unenhanced head CT, 0.9-1.4 mSv (9-13%) for men who underwent chest CT, and 4.7-4.8 mSv (39%) for women who underwent chest CT (p \u3c 0.001). The EDDLP overestimated the EDMCO by 1.9-2.0 mSv (12-14%) for men who underwent abdominopelvic CT (p \u3c 0.001), with no significant difference noted for women who underwent abdominopelvic CT’s. No significant difference was noted in the percentage difference in ED between the 16- and 64-MDCT scanners (p ≥ 0.13). CONCLUSION. EDDLP underestimates EDMCO, the reference standard for dose calculation, by 19-39% in unenhanced head CT examinations and, among women, in chest CT examinations. EDDLP deviates from EDMCO by less than 15% for chest CT examinations of men and for abdominopelvic CT. These differences can be attributed to variable patient body habitus, automatic tube current modulation, and sex-neutral k-coefficients, and they should be considered when calculating ED, particularly in women

General acts passed by the General Court of Massachusetts

Imprint varies.Vols. for 1915-19 published in 2 v.: General acts; Special acts.Vols. for some years issued in parts.Separate vols. issued for extra session, 1916, and for extra session, 1933.Vol. 12 (May 1831-Mar. 1833) in Jan. session, 1833; Jan. 1834-Apr. 1836 in vol. for extra session 1835/Jan. session 1836; May 1824-Mar. 1828; June 1828-June 1831, Jan. 1832-Apr. 1834, Jan. 1835-Apr. 1838, each bound with corresponding vol.Resolves issued separately, 1780-1838