Cargando…
Clinically Unjustified Diagnostic Imaging – a Worrisome Tendency in Today’s Medical Practice
BACKGROUND: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the percentage of unjustified examinations among all the CT and MRI studies performed by two radiology departments and to determine the types of examinations which are most commonly carried out unnecessarily. MATERIAL/METHODS: Three radiologists a...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
International Scientific Literature, Inc.
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4946391/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27471577 http://dx.doi.org/10.12659/PJR.896847 |
_version_ | 1782443020113674240 |
---|---|
author | Sobiecka, Aleksandra Bekiesińska-Figatowska, Monika Rutkowska, Milena Latos, Tomasz Walecki, Jerzy |
author_facet | Sobiecka, Aleksandra Bekiesińska-Figatowska, Monika Rutkowska, Milena Latos, Tomasz Walecki, Jerzy |
author_sort | Sobiecka, Aleksandra |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the percentage of unjustified examinations among all the CT and MRI studies performed by two radiology departments and to determine the types of examinations which are most commonly carried out unnecessarily. MATERIAL/METHODS: Three radiologists assessed the justification of CT and MRI examinations performed during a period of 14 days based on the referrals. The radiologists assessed 799 referrals for CT scans (847 examinations of a particular part of the body) and 269 MRI referrals (269 examinations). The criteria for justification were: medical expertise and the guidelines. During the first stage radiologists divided the examinations into 3 groups: justified, unjustified and the examinations of questionable justification. The second step was to determine the reasons why the studies were considered as unjustified or of questionable justification. RESULTS: 73 of 1116 examinations (6.54%) were considered to be unjustified or of a questionable justification. There were 59 CT scans (59/847=6.97%) and 14 MRI studies (14/269=5.20%). The most common reasons to consider them as unjustified or of questionable justification were: inadequate method of diagnostic imaging chosen as a first-line tool and lacking or insufficient clinical details. CONCLUSIONS: In our investigation 6.54% of both CT and MRI examinations were considered as unjustified or of questionable justification, which is lower than described in other studies (from 7% to 26%). The assessment was based only on referrals, therefore a total share of these examinations is likely to be higher. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4946391 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | International Scientific Literature, Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-49463912016-07-28 Clinically Unjustified Diagnostic Imaging – a Worrisome Tendency in Today’s Medical Practice Sobiecka, Aleksandra Bekiesińska-Figatowska, Monika Rutkowska, Milena Latos, Tomasz Walecki, Jerzy Pol J Radiol Original Article BACKGROUND: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the percentage of unjustified examinations among all the CT and MRI studies performed by two radiology departments and to determine the types of examinations which are most commonly carried out unnecessarily. MATERIAL/METHODS: Three radiologists assessed the justification of CT and MRI examinations performed during a period of 14 days based on the referrals. The radiologists assessed 799 referrals for CT scans (847 examinations of a particular part of the body) and 269 MRI referrals (269 examinations). The criteria for justification were: medical expertise and the guidelines. During the first stage radiologists divided the examinations into 3 groups: justified, unjustified and the examinations of questionable justification. The second step was to determine the reasons why the studies were considered as unjustified or of questionable justification. RESULTS: 73 of 1116 examinations (6.54%) were considered to be unjustified or of a questionable justification. There were 59 CT scans (59/847=6.97%) and 14 MRI studies (14/269=5.20%). The most common reasons to consider them as unjustified or of questionable justification were: inadequate method of diagnostic imaging chosen as a first-line tool and lacking or insufficient clinical details. CONCLUSIONS: In our investigation 6.54% of both CT and MRI examinations were considered as unjustified or of questionable justification, which is lower than described in other studies (from 7% to 26%). The assessment was based only on referrals, therefore a total share of these examinations is likely to be higher. International Scientific Literature, Inc. 2016-07-13 /pmc/articles/PMC4946391/ /pubmed/27471577 http://dx.doi.org/10.12659/PJR.896847 Text en © Pol J Radiol, 2016 This is an open access article. Unrestricted non-commercial use is permitted provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Sobiecka, Aleksandra Bekiesińska-Figatowska, Monika Rutkowska, Milena Latos, Tomasz Walecki, Jerzy Clinically Unjustified Diagnostic Imaging – a Worrisome Tendency in Today’s Medical Practice |
title | Clinically Unjustified Diagnostic Imaging – a Worrisome Tendency in Today’s Medical Practice |
title_full | Clinically Unjustified Diagnostic Imaging – a Worrisome Tendency in Today’s Medical Practice |
title_fullStr | Clinically Unjustified Diagnostic Imaging – a Worrisome Tendency in Today’s Medical Practice |
title_full_unstemmed | Clinically Unjustified Diagnostic Imaging – a Worrisome Tendency in Today’s Medical Practice |
title_short | Clinically Unjustified Diagnostic Imaging – a Worrisome Tendency in Today’s Medical Practice |
title_sort | clinically unjustified diagnostic imaging – a worrisome tendency in today’s medical practice |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4946391/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27471577 http://dx.doi.org/10.12659/PJR.896847 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sobieckaaleksandra clinicallyunjustifieddiagnosticimagingaworrisometendencyintodaysmedicalpractice AT bekiesinskafigatowskamonika clinicallyunjustifieddiagnosticimagingaworrisometendencyintodaysmedicalpractice AT rutkowskamilena clinicallyunjustifieddiagnosticimagingaworrisometendencyintodaysmedicalpractice AT latostomasz clinicallyunjustifieddiagnosticimagingaworrisometendencyintodaysmedicalpractice AT waleckijerzy clinicallyunjustifieddiagnosticimagingaworrisometendencyintodaysmedicalpractice |