SUMMARY: Diagnostic imaging is the most rapidly growing physician service in the Medicare and privately insured population. The growing share of medical costs devoted to imaging procedures has led to increasing concerns among the key federal agencies and private payers. In an attempt to educate health care providers, patients, and families on the importance of making optimal clinical decisions, the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation organized the Choosing Wisely initiative with strong collaboration from specialty societies representing nearly all medical disciplines. Among 45 tests and treatments listed on the Choosing Wisely Web site, 24 are directly related to imaging. Eleven of the 24 are associated with neuroimaging. The listing of imaging tests in the Choosing Wisely program by multiple medical societies other than the radiology societies acknowledges that appropriate use of medical imaging is a shared responsibility between radiologists and referring physicians. In this article, we highlight why radiologists are uniquely positioned to support the appropriate use of imaging. We review some of the strategies that radiologists can use to help their referring physicians with appropriate ordering of neuroimaging in real-world practice and address some the challenges and pitfalls in implementing patient-centered imaging decision-making and shifting to a value-based focus in radiology. ABBREVIATIONS: AAFP

Background Accurate and timely injury identification is critical but difficult to achieve in trauma patients who die shortly after arrival to the hospital. Autopsy has historically been used to detect injuries, but few undergo formal autopsy. This study investigates the utility of post-mortem computed tomography (PMCT) for injury identification in a diverse trauma population. Methods Cross-sectional study of adult trauma patients who died within 24 hours of arrival to a Level I trauma center were included. Among patients with PMCT, injury severity score (ISS) and number of injuries (NOI) were calculated either from physical exam alone (pre-PMCT) or exam and imaging (post-PMCT). ISS and NOI before and after PMCT were compared. A cause of death analysis was performed for patients who underwent comprehensive (ie, head, neck, and torso) PMCT. Non-parametric repeated measures tests were used, as appropriate. Results 7.3% (N = 28) of patients received PMCT. Compared to pre-PMCT, median ISS (21 vs 3.5) and NOI (5 vs 2) were greater post-PMCT ( P < .001, respectively). Autopsy rate was 13.2% overall; 82.5% of autopsies were due to a penetrating mechanism, and median time to autopsy reporting was 38.5 days. Among 17 patients who received comprehensive PMCT, 64.7% had a single cause of death identified, and the remaining were classified as either multiple potential contributors or unknown. Discussion PMCT is a readily available method to identify injuries in trauma patients who expire shortly upon presentation. Given the low autopsy rate for blunt trauma and delay in reporting, PMCT is an important adjunct for trauma providers.