Cargando…
Focused versus screening CT scans for evaluation of nontraumatic abdominal pain in the emergency department
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the utility of computed tomography (CT) scans in patients with abdominal pain in the emergency department. We compared focused scans (having a single diagnosis in mind) and screening scans (having no diagnosis or more than one diagnosis in mind) with the hypothesis that focuse...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove Medical Press
2010
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4806823/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27147834 |
_version_ | 1782423292302327808 |
---|---|
author | Thurston, Kristy Magge, Suma Fuller, Robert Voytovich, Anthony Lee, Jessica Kozol, Robert |
author_facet | Thurston, Kristy Magge, Suma Fuller, Robert Voytovich, Anthony Lee, Jessica Kozol, Robert |
author_sort | Thurston, Kristy |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the utility of computed tomography (CT) scans in patients with abdominal pain in the emergency department. We compared focused scans (having a single diagnosis in mind) and screening scans (having no diagnosis or more than one diagnosis in mind) with the hypothesis that focused scans will reveal pathology more often than screening scans. Treatment plans and patient outcomes were also compared between the two populations. METHODS: This is a prospective study in which 100 patients who presented to an academic medical center with abdominal pain and underwent an abdominal CT were enrolled in the study. A chart review was later completed to gather ultimate outcome data for each of the enrolled subjects. RESULTS: Of the 61 patients having a focused CT, pathology was identified on 63.9% of the scans, which did not differ significantly from the 65.4% of scans that revealed pathology in the screening group. In the focused group, anticipated admissions were reduced, but the reduction was not significant. The screening group did show a significant difference, with eight fewer patients being admitted than initially planned. The total number of patients deemed to require admission was significantly reduced by 15% following all CT scans. CONCLUSION: While there was no difference between the focused and screening groups in the rate of identifying pathology, there was a significant decline in number of patients requiring admission to the hospital in the “screening” CT group (when comparing emergency physicians’ pre- and post-CT treatment plans). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4806823 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2010 |
publisher | Dove Medical Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-48068232016-05-04 Focused versus screening CT scans for evaluation of nontraumatic abdominal pain in the emergency department Thurston, Kristy Magge, Suma Fuller, Robert Voytovich, Anthony Lee, Jessica Kozol, Robert Open Access Emerg Med Original Research OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the utility of computed tomography (CT) scans in patients with abdominal pain in the emergency department. We compared focused scans (having a single diagnosis in mind) and screening scans (having no diagnosis or more than one diagnosis in mind) with the hypothesis that focused scans will reveal pathology more often than screening scans. Treatment plans and patient outcomes were also compared between the two populations. METHODS: This is a prospective study in which 100 patients who presented to an academic medical center with abdominal pain and underwent an abdominal CT were enrolled in the study. A chart review was later completed to gather ultimate outcome data for each of the enrolled subjects. RESULTS: Of the 61 patients having a focused CT, pathology was identified on 63.9% of the scans, which did not differ significantly from the 65.4% of scans that revealed pathology in the screening group. In the focused group, anticipated admissions were reduced, but the reduction was not significant. The screening group did show a significant difference, with eight fewer patients being admitted than initially planned. The total number of patients deemed to require admission was significantly reduced by 15% following all CT scans. CONCLUSION: While there was no difference between the focused and screening groups in the rate of identifying pathology, there was a significant decline in number of patients requiring admission to the hospital in the “screening” CT group (when comparing emergency physicians’ pre- and post-CT treatment plans). Dove Medical Press 2010-03-31 /pmc/articles/PMC4806823/ /pubmed/27147834 Text en © 2010 Thurston et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Thurston, Kristy Magge, Suma Fuller, Robert Voytovich, Anthony Lee, Jessica Kozol, Robert Focused versus screening CT scans for evaluation of nontraumatic abdominal pain in the emergency department |
title | Focused versus screening CT scans for evaluation of nontraumatic abdominal pain in the emergency department |
title_full | Focused versus screening CT scans for evaluation of nontraumatic abdominal pain in the emergency department |
title_fullStr | Focused versus screening CT scans for evaluation of nontraumatic abdominal pain in the emergency department |
title_full_unstemmed | Focused versus screening CT scans for evaluation of nontraumatic abdominal pain in the emergency department |
title_short | Focused versus screening CT scans for evaluation of nontraumatic abdominal pain in the emergency department |
title_sort | focused versus screening ct scans for evaluation of nontraumatic abdominal pain in the emergency department |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4806823/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27147834 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT thurstonkristy focusedversusscreeningctscansforevaluationofnontraumaticabdominalpainintheemergencydepartment AT maggesuma focusedversusscreeningctscansforevaluationofnontraumaticabdominalpainintheemergencydepartment AT fullerrobert focusedversusscreeningctscansforevaluationofnontraumaticabdominalpainintheemergencydepartment AT voytovichanthony focusedversusscreeningctscansforevaluationofnontraumaticabdominalpainintheemergencydepartment AT leejessica focusedversusscreeningctscansforevaluationofnontraumaticabdominalpainintheemergencydepartment AT kozolrobert focusedversusscreeningctscansforevaluationofnontraumaticabdominalpainintheemergencydepartment |