Computed Tomography (CT) scans, often referred to as CAT scans, are powerful diagnostic tools in modern medicine, especially for children. However, with their increasing use, particularly in pediatrics, it’s crucial to understand not only their benefits but also the associated radiation risks and financial implications, such as insurance coverage under plans like Blue Care. This article aims to provide a comprehensive overview of pediatric CT scans, addressing concerns about radiation exposure and exploring the question, “What Is Cat Scan Under Blue Care?” in the context of healthcare for children.
CT Scans as Essential Diagnostic Tools
CT scans are invaluable in pediatrics for quickly and accurately diagnosing a wide range of conditions, from injuries to illnesses. For an individual child, when medically necessary, the benefits of a CT scan in providing a diagnosis generally outweigh the small associated risks.
In the United States, millions of CT scans are performed on children each year, and this number has significantly increased since the 1980s. This rise is due to CT scans’ effectiveness in diagnosing common childhood diseases and advancements in CT technology.
Despite their diagnostic advantages, CT scans expose patients to radiation. While CT scans constitute a relatively small percentage of all radiological procedures, they contribute significantly to the overall radiation dose received by the population from medical imaging. In fact, CT scans are the largest source of medical radiation exposure in the US.
Unique Radiation Sensitivity in Children
Radiation exposure is a concern for everyone, but children have unique vulnerabilities that make them more susceptible to the potential risks of radiation from CT scans. These considerations are critical when evaluating “what is cat scan under blue care” because they influence the necessity and justification for these procedures in children.
Firstly, children are inherently more sensitive to radiation than adults. Epidemiological studies have shown that younger populations are more prone to radiation-induced health effects.
Secondly, children have longer lifespans ahead of them. This extended lifespan means a greater window of opportunity for radiation-related damage to manifest as health issues later in life, such as cancer.
Thirdly, children are often smaller than adults, and if CT scan settings are not specifically adjusted for pediatric patients, they can receive unnecessarily high doses of radiation.
Consequently, the risk of developing cancer from radiation exposure can be several times higher for a young child compared to an adult undergoing the same CT scan.
While CT technology has improved, allowing for better images at lower doses, and the use of pediatric-specific settings has become more common, the potential risks are still present, especially with multiple scans. Furthermore, using multiple scan phases during a single examination increases radiation dose. In most pediatric cases, a single, well-optimized scan should be sufficient.
Understanding Radiation Risks from Pediatric CT Scans
Leading health organizations agree that there is likely no absolutely “safe” threshold for radiation exposure in terms of cancer risk. Any radiation dose carries some level of potential risk.
A significant study investigating cancer risk after CT scans in childhood revealed a direct link between radiation dose and cancer development. The study found that for children receiving cumulative doses of 50-60 mGy (milligray – a unit of absorbed radiation dose) to the head, the risk of brain tumors increased threefold. A similar dose to the bone marrow was associated with a threefold increase in leukemia risk. These risks were compared to children who received less than 5 mGy.
The number of CT scans required to reach a cumulative dose of 50-60 mGy varies based on the type of scan, the child’s age, and the CT scanner settings. Using typical settings for pediatric head CT scans, just two to three scans could deliver this dose to the brain. For bone marrow, it would take five to ten head CT scans using current settings for children under 15.
These findings are consistent with previous risk estimates derived from studies of atomic bomb survivors, reinforcing the concern about radiation exposure from CT scans, especially in children.
It’s important to emphasize that the absolute cancer risks from CT scans are still small. Estimates suggest that the lifetime cancer risk from CT scans is around 1 in 1,000 people scanned, with a maximum estimate of 1 in 500.
However, the key takeaway is that while the benefits of necessary CT scans generally outweigh the risks, unnecessary CT scans expose children to avoidable radiation and thus unnecessary risk. Minimizing radiation exposure in pediatric CT scans is paramount to reducing the projected number of CT-related cancers in the future. This consideration is vital when parents and healthcare providers discuss “what is cat scan under blue care,” ensuring the procedure is justified and optimized for the child’s safety.
Immediate Steps to Minimize Radiation Exposure
Minimizing radiation exposure from CT scans in children is a shared responsibility. Physicians, pediatric healthcare providers, CT technologists, manufacturers, and medical organizations all play a role. Several immediate measures can be implemented:
- Justify every CT scan: Communication between healthcare providers and radiologists is crucial to determine the necessity of a CT scan and the appropriate technique. Radiologists should review the reasons for every pediatric CT scan and be available for consultation when the need is uncertain. Alternative imaging methods like ultrasound or MRI, which do not use ionizing radiation, should be considered when appropriate.
- Optimize exposure parameters: CT scan settings should be adjusted for each child based on:
- Child size: Guidelines based on individual size and weight should be used.
- Region scanned: The scan area should be limited to the smallest area necessary.
- Organ systems: Lower mA and/or kVp settings should be considered for specific types of imaging like skeletal, lung, and some CT angiography and follow-up examinations.
- Minimize scan resolution and phases: The highest image quality (which uses more radiation) is not always required for diagnosis. Lower-resolution scans can often be diagnostic. Healthcare providers should be aware of dose descriptors on CT scanners and minimize multiphase examinations (scans with multiple contrast phases) as they significantly increase radiation dose and are rarely necessary, especially for body imaging.
Questions for Parents to Ask:
Parents understandably have concerns about radiation exposure when their child needs a CT scan. Healthcare providers should be prepared to address questions like:
- “Is a CT scan the most appropriate test for my child’s condition?”
- “Are there alternative tests that don’t involve radiation, like ultrasound or MRI?”
- “Will the CT scan results change my child’s treatment plan?”
- “Will the CT scan be adjusted to minimize radiation exposure based on my child’s size?”
- “Will the scan be performed at an accredited facility by a team experienced in pediatric CT?”
Studies have shown that providing parents with information about the risks and benefits of CT scans doesn’t decrease their compliance with recommended scans but does lead to more informed questions for healthcare providers.
If a CT scan is clinically justified, parents can be reassured that the benefits outweigh the small long-term cancer risks. Understanding “what is cat scan under blue care” also involves being informed about the procedure itself and asking pertinent questions to ensure the child’s safety and well-being.
Long-Term Strategies for Radiation Reduction
Beyond immediate measures, long-term strategies are essential to minimize CT radiation exposure in children:
- Promote pediatric CT protocols: Encourage the development and widespread adoption of standardized pediatric CT protocols that prioritize radiation dose reduction.
- Encourage selective imaging strategies: Promote the use of guidelines and algorithms that help determine when CT scans are truly necessary, such as for pre-surgical evaluation of appendicitis.
- Educate healthcare professionals: Continue educating radiologists and other healthcare providers through publications and conferences about optimizing CT settings and judiciously using CT scans in children. Disseminate information through relevant organizations like the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Emergency Physicians and readily available resources like the Image Gently campaign.
- Conduct ongoing research: Support further research to refine CT techniques, customize scanning for individual children, and better understand the long-term relationship between CT radiation and cancer risk.
Conclusion: Balancing Benefit and Risk in Pediatric CT Scans
CT scans are undeniably a vital diagnostic tool for children. However, it is crucial for the medical community and parents to work together to minimize radiation exposure. Radiologists must continually strive to reduce radiation doses to the lowest reasonably achievable levels by using child-specific settings. Physicians ordering pediatric CT scans should carefully evaluate the necessity of each scan on a case-by-case basis. When used appropriately and optimally, CT scans remain one of the most valuable imaging modalities for children, providing crucial diagnostic information while minimizing potential risks. Understanding aspects like “what is cat scan under blue care” extends beyond just insurance coverage to encompass the responsible and safe use of this technology for children’s health.
Related Resources
Society for Pediatric Radiology
1891 Preston White Drive
Reston, Virginia 20191
http://www.pedrad.org
References
Amis ES, Jr., Butler PF, Applegate KE, et al. American College of Radiology white paper on radiation dose in medicine. Journal of the American College of Radiology 2007; 4:272-284.
Arch ME, Frush DP. Pediatric body MDCT: A 5-year follow-up survey of scanning parameters used by pediatric radiologists. American Journal of Roentgenology 2008:191;611-617
Berrington de Gonzále. A, Mahesh M, Kim KP, Bhargavan M, Lewis R, Mettler F, Land C. Projected cancer risks from computed tomographic scans performed in the United States in 2007. Archives of Internal Medicine 2009; 169: 2071-7.
Brenner DJ, Doll R, Goodhead DT, et al. Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: Assessing what we really know. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2003; 100:13761-13766.
Brenner DJ, Elliston CD, Hall EJ, Berdon WE. Estimated risks of radiation-induced fatal cancer from pediatric CT. American Journal of Roentgenology 2001; 176:289-296.
Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Current concepts – Computed tomography – An increasing source of radiation exposure. New England Journal of Medicine 2007; 357:2277-2284.
Brody AS, Frush DP, Huda W, Brent RL, Radiology AAoPSo. Radiation risk to children from computed tomography. Pediatrics 2007; 120:677-682.
Cardis E, Vrijheid M, Blettner M, et al. The 15-country collaborative study of cancer risk among radiation workers in the nuclear industry: Estimates of radiation-related cancer risks. Radiation Research 2007; 167:396-416.
Chodick G, Ronckers C, Ron E, Shalev V. The utilization of pediatric computed tomography in a large Israeli Health Maintenance Organization. Pediatric Radiology 2006; 36:485-490.
Chodick G, Ronckers CM, Shalev V, Ron E. Excess lifetime cancer mortality risk attributable to radiation exposure from computed tomography examinations in children. Israel Medical Association Journal 2007; 9:584-587.
da Costa e Silva EJ, da Silva GA. Eliminating unenhanced CT when evaluating abdominal neoplasms in children. American Journal of Roentgenology 2007; 189:1211-1214.
Donnelly LF, Emery KH, Brody AS, et al. Minimizing radiation dose for pediatric body applications of single-detector helical CT: Strategies at a large children’s hospital. American Journal of Roentgenology 2001; 176:303-306.
Frush DP, Applegate K. Computed tomography and radiation: understanding the issues. Journal of the American College of Radiology 2004; 1:113-119.
Frush DP, Donnelly LF, Rosen NS. Computed tomography and radiation risks: What pediatric health care providers should know. Pediatrics 2003; 112:951-957.
Garcia Peña BM, Cook EF, Mandl KD. Selective imaging strategies for the diagnosis of appendicitis in children. Pediatrics 2004; 113:24-28.
Goske MJ, Applegate KE, Boylan J, et al. The ‘Image Gently’ campaign: increasing CT radiation dose awareness through a national education and awareness program. Pediatric Radiology 2008; 38:265-269.
Huda W, Vance A. Patient radiation doses from adult and pediatric CT. American Journal of Roentgenology 2007; 188:540-546.
Larson DB, Rader SB, Forman HP, Fenton LZ. Informing parents about CT radiation exposure in children: It’s OK to tell them. American Journal of Roentgenology 2007; 189:271-275.
McNitt-Gray MF. AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: Topics in CT – Radiation dose in CT1. Radiographics 2002; 22:1541-1553.
Mettler FA, Jr., Wiest PW, Locken JA, Kelsey CA. CT scanning: patterns of use and dose. Journal of Radiological Protection 2000; 20:353-359.
NAS. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII phase 2. Washington D.C.: National Academy of Sciences, 2005.
NCRP. Ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States. NCRP Report 160. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Bethesda, Maryland, 2009.
Paterson A, Frush DP, Donnelly LF. Helical CT of the body: Are settings adjusted for pediatric patients? American Journal of Roentgenology 2001; 176:297-301.
Pearce MS, Salotti JA, Little MP, et al. Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumours: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet (published online June 7th 2012).
Pierce DA, Preston DL. Radiation-related cancer risks at low doses among atomic bomb survivors. Radiation Research 2000; 154:178-186.
Preston DL, Ron E, Tokuoka S, et al. Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors: 1958-1998. Radiation Research 2007; 168:1-64.
Rogers LF. Taking care of children: Check out the parameters used for helical CT. American Journal of Roentgenology 2001; 176:287-287.
Slovis TL. The ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) concept in pediatric CT intelligent dose reduction. Multidisciplinary conference organized by the Society of Pediatric Radiology. August 18-19, 2001. Pediatric Radiology 2002; 32:217-317.
Strauss KJ, Goske MJ. Estimated pediatric radiation dose during CT. Pediatric Radiology 2011; 41(suppl2):S472-482.
Thomas KE, Wang BB. Age-specific effective doses for pediatric MSCT examinations at a large children’s hospital using DLP conversion coefficients: a simple estimation method. Pediatric Radiology 2008; 38:645-656.
