Simulation of AI-driven CT Imaging Queue Prioritization in the Emergency Department

Purpose To evaluate the impact of an AI-driven CT queue prioritization system on emergency department (ED) CT wait times using a discrete-event simulation (DES). Materials and Methods Multimodal data from 313,966 ED visits (August 2020-August 2024) were retrospectively analyzed. A LightGBM model was trained to predict the clinical actionability of CT studies at the time of order. DESs, calibrated to real-world operations, were conducted to compare a first-in-first-out (FIFO) policy against an AI-driven prioritization policy on the internal test set of 20,795 studies (March-August 2024). Wait times for actionable and nonactionable studies were compared between the FIFO and AI-based dispatch policies, with bootstrap 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and ceiling analyses using perfect predictions. Results Compared with the FIFO policy, the AI-based dispatch policy reduced median wait times for actionable studies in the internal test set (7,637/20,795, 36.73%) by 10.75 minutes (95% CI: -12.40, -9.10) and 90th-percentile wait times by 43.36 minutes (95% CI: -50.58, -36.80). The proportion of actionable findings obtained within one hour increased from 48.33% (3,691/7,637) to 57.30% (4,376/7,637). For nonactionable studies, the median wait time was reduced by 5.80 minutes (95% CI: -7.00, -4.40), but the 90th percentile wait time increased by 14.46 minutes (95% CI: 6.40, 23.20). The model captured 80-87% of the maximum benefit achievable with perfect predictions. Conclusion AI-driven CT imaging queue prioritization can reduce the time to diagnosis for critical findings with minimal disruption to lower-acuity patients, using existing data streams and without the need for additional hardware. ©RSNA, 2026.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Radiology Artificial Intelligence
Published
2026-07-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1148/ryai.260110
Primary Topic
Radiology practices and education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Simulation of AI-driven CT Imaging Queue Prioritization in the Emergency Department

Xiaoman Zhang, Erica Silva, Kevin Tang, Curtis P. Langlotz et al.
Radiology Artificial Intelligence
Radiology practices and education
article

Simulation of AI-driven CT Imaging Queue Prioritization in the Emergency Department

Xiaoman Zhang, Erica Silva, Kevin Tang, Curtis P. Langlotz, David Kim, Sam Chiacchia
article en

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate the impact of an AI-driven CT queue prioritization system on emergency department (ED) CT wait times using a discrete-event simulation (DES). Materials and Methods Multimodal data from 313,966 ED visits (August 2020-August 2024) were retrospectively analyzed. A LightGBM model was trained to predict the clinical actionability of CT studies at the time of order. DESs, calibrated to real-world operations, were conducted to compare a first-in-first-out (FIFO) policy against an AI-driven prioritization policy on the internal test set of 20,795 studies (March-August 2024). Wait times for actionable and nonactionable studies were compared between the FIFO and AI-based dispatch policies, with bootstrap 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and ceiling analyses using perfect predictions. Results Compared with the FIFO policy, the AI-based dispatch policy reduced median wait times for actionable studies in the internal test set (7,637/20,795, 36.73%) by 10.75 minutes (95% CI: -12.40, -9.10) and 90th-percentile wait times by 43.36 minutes (95% CI: -50.58, -36.80). The proportion of actionable findings obtained within one hour increased from 48.33% (3,691/7,637) to 57.30% (4,376/7,637). For nonactionable studies, the median wait time was reduced by 5.80 minutes (95% CI: -7.00, -4.40), but the 90th percentile wait time increased by 14.46 minutes (95% CI: 6.40, 23.20). The model captured 80-87% of the maximum benefit achievable with perfect predictions. Conclusion AI-driven CT imaging queue prioritization can reduce the time to diagnosis for critical findings with minimal disruption to lower-acuity patients, using existing data streams and without the need for additional hardware. ©RSNA, 2026.

Radiology Artificial Intelligence
Harvard University (US), Stanford University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Radiology practices and education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.