Effect of Promotion via Social Media on Access of Articles in an Academic Medical Journal: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: To study the effect of a planned social media promotion strategy on access of online articles in an established academic medical journal. METHOD: This was a single-masked, randomized controlled trial using articles published in Mayo Clinic Proceedings, a large-circulation general/internal medicine journal. Articles published during the months of October, November, and December 2015 (n = 68) were randomized to social media promotion (SoMe) using Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn or to no social media promotion (NoSoMe), for 30 days (beginning with the date of online article publication). Journal website visits and full-text article downloads were compared for 0-30 and 31-60 days following online publication between SoMe versus NoSoMe using a Wilcoxon rank-sum test. RESULTS: Website access of articles from 0 to 30 days was significantly higher in the SoMe group (n = 34) compared with the NoSoMe group (n = 34): 1,070 median downloads versus 265, P < .001. Similarly, full-text article downloads from 0-30 days were significantly higher in the SoMe group: 1,042 median downloads versus 142, P < .001. Compared with the NoSoMe articles, articles randomized to SoMe received a greater number of website visits via Twitter (90 vs 1), Facebook (526 vs 2.5), and LinkedIn (31.5 vs 0)-all P < .001. CONCLUSIONS: Articles randomized to SoMe were more widely accessed compared with those without social media promotion. These findings show a possible role, benefit, and need for further study of a carefully planned social media promotion strategy in an academic medical journal.

2018 ACC/HRS/NASCI/SCAI/SCCT Expert Consensus Document on Optimal Use of Ionizing Radiation in Cardiovascular Imaging-Best Practices for Safety and Effectiveness, Part 2: Radiological Equipment Operation, Dose-Sparing Methodologies, Patient and Medical Personnel Protection.

The stimulus to create this document was the recognition that ionizing radiation-guided cardiovascular procedures are being performed with increasing frequency, leading to greater patient radiation exposure and, potentially, to greater exposure to clinical personnel. While the clinical benefit of these procedures is substantial, there is concern about the implications of medical radiation exposure. ACC leadership concluded that it is important to provide practitioners with an educational resource that assembles and interprets the current radiation knowledge base relevant to cardiovascular procedures. By applying this knowledge base, cardiovascular practitioners will be able to select procedures optimally, and minimize radiation exposure to patients and to clinical personnel. "Optimal Use of Ionizing Radiation in Cardiovascular Imaging - Best Practices for Safety and Effectiveness" is a comprehensive overview of ionizing radiation use in cardiovascular procedures and is published online. To provide the most value to our members, we divided the print version of this document into 2 focused parts. "Part I: Radiation Physics and Radiation Biology" addresses radiation physics, dosimetry and detrimental biologic effects. "Part II: Radiologic Equipment Operation, Dose-Sparing Methodologies, Patient and Medical Personnel Protection" covers the basics of operation and radiation delivery for the 3 cardiovascular imaging modalities (x-ray fluoroscopy, x-ray computed tomography, and nuclear scintigraphy). For each modality, it includes the determinants of radiation exposure and techniques to minimize exposure to both patients and to medical personnel.

2018 ACC/HRS/NASCI/SCAI/SCCT Expert Consensus Document on Optimal Use of Ionizing Radiation in Cardiovascular Imaging-Best Practices for Safety and Effectiveness, Part 1: Radiation Physics and Radiation Biology: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Task Force on Expert Consensus Decision Pathways Developed in Collaboration With Mended Hearts.

The stimulus to create this document was the recognition that ionizing radiation-guided cardiovascular procedures are being performed with increasing frequency, leading to greater patient radiation exposure and, potentially, to greater exposure for clinical personnel. Although the clinical benefit of these procedures is substantial, there is concern about the implications of medical radiation exposure. The American College of Cardiology leadership concluded that it is important to provide practitioners with an educational resource that assembles and interprets the current radiation knowledge base relevant to cardiovascular procedures. By applying this knowledge base, cardiovascular practitioners will be able to select procedures optimally, and minimize radiation exposure to patients and to clinical personnel. Optimal Use of Ionizing Radiation in Cardiovascular Imaging: Best Practices for Safety and Effectiveness is a comprehensive overview of ionizing radiation use in cardiovascular procedures and is published online. To provide the most value to our members, we divided the print version of this document into 2 focused parts. Part I: Radiation Physics and Radiation Biology addresses the issue of medical radiation exposure, the basics of radiation physics and dosimetry, and the basics of radiation biology and radiation-induced adverse effects. Part II: Radiological Equipment Operation, Dose-Sparing Methodologies, Patient and Medical Personnel Protection covers the basics of operation and radiation delivery for the 3 cardiovascular imaging modalities (x-ray fluoroscopy, x-ray computed tomography, and nuclear scintigraphy) and will be published in the next issue of the Journal.

Defining Quality in Cardiovascular Imaging: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

The aims of the current statement are to refine the definition of quality in cardiovascular imaging and to propose novel methodological approaches to inform the demonstration of quality in imaging in future clinical trials and registries. We propose defining quality in cardiovascular imaging using an analytical framework put forth by the Institute of Medicine whereby quality was defined as testing being safe, effective, patient-centered, timely, equitable, and efficient. The implications of each of these components of quality health care are as essential for cardiovascular imaging as they are for other areas within health care. Our proposed statement may serve as the foundation for integrating these quality indicators into establishing designations of quality laboratory practices and developing standards for value-based payment reform for imaging services. We also include recommendations for future clinical research to fulfill quality aims within cardiovascular imaging, including clinical hypotheses of improving patient outcomes, the importance of health status as an end point, and deferred testing options. Future research should evolve to define novel methods optimized for the role of cardiovascular imaging for detecting disease and guiding treatment and to demonstrate the role of cardiovascular imaging in facilitating healthcare quality.

Emerging role of cardiovascular CT and MRI in the evaluation of stroke.

OBJECTIVE. The purposes of this article are to explore the potential for use of CT angiography and MRI and to highlight data suggestive of their usefulness in specific cardiovascular abnormalities. CONCLUSION. The evaluation of stroke requires comprehensive assessment of potential stroke mechanisms, including cardiac sources. Despite an exhaustive search for secondary causes, the precise cause of many strokes remains unknown (cryptogenic). It is well recognized, however, that some of these potential causes occur as a result of embolism from the heart or great vessels. Thus, echocardiography, in particular transesophageal echocardiography, is instrumental in a careful assessment of cardiac causes in selected individuals. Unfortunately, transesophageal echocardiography is invasive, and some patients may have relative or absolute contraindications. Cardiovascular CT angiography and MRI have growing potential compared with conventional cardiovascular echography.

Approaches to enhancing radiation safety in cardiovascular imaging: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association.

Education, justification, and optimization are the cornerstones to enhancing the radiation safety of medical imaging. Education regarding the benefits and risks of imaging and the principles of radiation safety is required for all clinicians in order for them to be able to use imaging optimally. Empowering patients with knowledge of the benefits and risks of imaging will facilitate their meaningful participation in decisions related to their health care, which is necessary to achieve patient-centered care. Limiting the use of imaging to appropriate clinical indications can ensure that the benefits of imaging outweigh any potential risks. Finally, the continually expanding repertoire of techniques that allow high-quality imaging with lower radiation exposure should be used when available to achieve safer imaging. The implementation of these strategies in practice is necessary to achieve high-quality, patient-centered imaging and will require a shared effort and investment by all stakeholders, including physicians, patients, national scientific and educational organizations, politicians, and industry.

Patient-centered imaging: shared decision making for cardiac imaging procedures with exposure to ionizing radiation.

The current paper details the recommendations arising from an NIH-NHLBI/NCI-sponsored symposium held in November 2012, aiming to identify key components of a radiation accountability framework fostering patient-centered imaging and shared decision-making in cardiac imaging. Symposium participants, working in 3 tracks, identified key components of a framework to target critical radiation safety issues for the patient, the laboratory, and the larger population of patients with known or suspected cardiovascular disease. The use of ionizing radiation during an imaging procedure should be disclosed to all patients by the ordering provider at the time of ordering, and reinforced by the performing provider team. An imaging protocol with effective dose ≤3 mSv is considered very low risk, not warranting extensive discussion or written informed consent. However, a protocol effective dose >20 mSv was proposed as a level requiring particular attention in terms of shared decision-making and either formal discussion or written informed consent. Laboratory reporting of radiation dosimetry is a critical component of creating a quality laboratory fostering a patient-centered environment with transparent procedural methodology. Efforts should be directed to avoiding testing involving radiation, in patients with inappropriate indications. Standardized reporting and diagnostic reference levels for computed tomography and nuclear cardiology are important for the goal of public reporting of laboratory radiation dose levels in conjunction with diagnostic performance. The development of cardiac imaging technologies revolutionized cardiology practice by allowing routine, noninvasive assessment of myocardial perfusion and anatomy. It is now incumbent upon the imaging community to create an accountability framework to safely drive appropriate imaging utilization.