Radiology · 2012
Lumbar MR imaging and reporting epidemiology: do epidemiologic data in reports affect clinical management?
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
McCullough Brendan J, Johnson Germaine R, Martin Brook I, Jarvik Jeffrey G
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To retrospectively examine the association between the inclusion of epidemiologic information in lumbar spine magnetic resonance (MR) imaging reports regarding findings in asymptomatic individuals and the rates of subsequent cross-sectional imaging and treatments in patients with low back pain or radiculopathy referred for imaging by primary care providers.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval was received for a retrospective chart review, with waiver of informed consent and HIPAA authorization. During 3 years, an epidemiologic statement was routinely but arbitrarily included in lumbar spine MR imaging reports. Two hundred thirty-seven reports documenting uncomplicated degenerative changes on initial lumbar spine MR images were identified, 71 (30%) of which included the statement (statement group) and 166 (70%) did not (nonstatement group). The rates of repeat cross-sectional imaging and treatments within 1 year were compared between groups by using logistic regression controlling for severity of MR imaging findings.
RESULTS: Patients in the statement group were significantly less likely to receive a prescription for narcotics for their symptoms than patients in the nonstatement group (odds ratio = 0.29, P = .01). Repeat cross-sectional imaging and physical therapy referrals were also less common in the statement group than in the nonstatement group (odds ratio = 0.22 and 0.55, respectively), but these differences were not statistically significant (P = .14 and .06, respectively). Rates of steroid injections, surgical consultations, and surgeries were similar between groups.
CONCLUSION: Patients were less likely to receive narcotics prescriptions from primary care providers when epidemiologic information was included in their lumbar spine MR imaging reports.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval was received for a retrospective chart review, with waiver of informed consent and HIPAA authorization. During 3 years, an epidemiologic statement was routinely but arbitrarily included in lumbar spine MR imaging reports. Two hundred thirty-seven reports documenting uncomplicated degenerative changes on initial lumbar spine MR images were identified, 71 (30%) of which included the statement (statement group) and 166 (70%) did not (nonstatement group). The rates of repeat cross-sectional imaging and treatments within 1 year were compared between groups by using logistic regression controlling for severity of MR imaging findings.
RESULTS: Patients in the statement group were significantly less likely to receive a prescription for narcotics for their symptoms than patients in the nonstatement group (odds ratio = 0.29, P = .01). Repeat cross-sectional imaging and physical therapy referrals were also less common in the statement group than in the nonstatement group (odds ratio = 0.22 and 0.55, respectively), but these differences were not statistically significant (P = .14 and .06, respectively). Rates of steroid injections, surgical consultations, and surgeries were similar between groups.
CONCLUSION: Patients were less likely to receive narcotics prescriptions from primary care providers when epidemiologic information was included in their lumbar spine MR imaging reports.