In addition to a lack of evidence-based benefit, many are downplaying the very real radiation risk. Take this typical exchange with a Florida “scan and tan” center:
Or “Come to Florida, for a scan and a tan,” flashes a Web ad for HealthTest Scan Center, where a pelvic, abdomen and chest scan will set you back $895, with a heart scan thrown in.When Tania answered the phone at Boca Raton, Fla., office, I said I wanted information but thought I was healthy. She chuckled, “Everyone thinks that, but it’s just to make sure. Prevention is better than a cure.” What can a scan prevent? “Death,” she replied. And if my doctor refuses to prescribe it? “See our doctor [either Dr. Marc Kaprow or Rohtem Amir]. He’ll give you the OK.”
I asked Tania about radiation danger. “It’s minimal”¦with this machine,” she reassured. How often should I get one? “Talk to the doctor, but some people have them four to five times in a six-month period.” Why? “Some people are hypochondriacs,” she confided.
Related posts:
- CT scans and radiation exposure
- When patients receive too much radiation from CT scans by mistake
- Full body scans
- CT scans and radiation
- Value of primary care
- Why the unnecessary CT scans?
- Full body scams
{ 3 comments }
…and some doctors are money hungry. ..Maurice.
The title of the article is so erroneous it’s not even funny.
I am a radiation safety professional at a large teaching hospital, and while I definitely don’t advocate these drive-through CT scans, the technology is a life saver when medically indicated. I take great issue with the underlying tone of the article that even occasional, medically necessary scans are a huge danger. The author of the article has grossly overstated facts about doses and risks from CT radiation. As technology improves (at lightning speed today), dose to the patient is reduced accordingly.
However – is it reckless for a patient to get 5 scans a year? If not indicated, absolutely. And shame on the physicians who write the orders.
As for the IRB issue, all IRB-approved protocols must state in the consent form what the risks of radiation exposure are. The protocols are reviewed by the Hospital’s Radiation Safety Committee to ensure that patients or subjects get the lowest radiation dose attainable for that particular procedure. It is up to the patient or subject to read the form and understand the potential risks involved.
The problem with whole-body CT scans is screening the worried well, for whom the scans can uncover all kinds of findings of unknown significance, but which demand intervention. “When medically indicated” is not necessarily the problem, though I’d like to see that application formally evaluated, too.
I can’t comment on the radiation dose.
Comments on this entry are closed.