Nuclear medicine communications · 2026
Clinical assessment before PET/computed tomography: frequency and diagnostic impact.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Alqahtani Mohammed A M, Arita Yuki, Noordzij Walter, Kwee Thomas C
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To investigate how often referring physicians perform history taking and physical examination before PET/computed tomography (PET/CT) referral, and whether their absence influences clinical reasoning quality or diagnostic yield.
METHODS: Patients undergoing PET/CT at a tertiary academic hospital were asked whether their referring physician had conducted history taking and physical examination before referral. Associations between omission of clinical assessment and clinical reasoning quality or PET/CT positivity (defined as PET/CT findings relevant to the clinical indication) were analyzed using multivariable regression.
RESULTS: Among 288 patients (median age: 66 years; 54% male), history taking was omitted in 18.2% and physical examination in 47.7%. For history taking, only referrals from pulmonology were significantly more likely to include history taking [odds ratio (OR): 4.708, P = 0.033]. For physical examination, referrals from residents were more likely to include physical examination (OR: 2.355, P = 0.022), as were surgical departments (OR: 8.527, P = 0.030), requests for new clinical complaints (OR: 2.303, P = 0.008), and total-body PET/CT scans (OR: 1.870, P = 0.037), whereas urology referrals were less likely (OR: 0.019, P = 0.008). Neither omission of history taking nor physical examination was associated with clinical reasoning quality or PET/CT positivity (all P > 0.15).
CONCLUSION: A relevant proportion of patients referred for PET/CT did not receive history taking or physical examination. While omission of these assessments did not appear to affect the clinical reasoning quality of the referring physicians or PET/CT yield, it may limit the contextual information available for interpreting imaging results.
METHODS: Patients undergoing PET/CT at a tertiary academic hospital were asked whether their referring physician had conducted history taking and physical examination before referral. Associations between omission of clinical assessment and clinical reasoning quality or PET/CT positivity (defined as PET/CT findings relevant to the clinical indication) were analyzed using multivariable regression.
RESULTS: Among 288 patients (median age: 66 years; 54% male), history taking was omitted in 18.2% and physical examination in 47.7%. For history taking, only referrals from pulmonology were significantly more likely to include history taking [odds ratio (OR): 4.708, P = 0.033]. For physical examination, referrals from residents were more likely to include physical examination (OR: 2.355, P = 0.022), as were surgical departments (OR: 8.527, P = 0.030), requests for new clinical complaints (OR: 2.303, P = 0.008), and total-body PET/CT scans (OR: 1.870, P = 0.037), whereas urology referrals were less likely (OR: 0.019, P = 0.008). Neither omission of history taking nor physical examination was associated with clinical reasoning quality or PET/CT positivity (all P > 0.15).
CONCLUSION: A relevant proportion of patients referred for PET/CT did not receive history taking or physical examination. While omission of these assessments did not appear to affect the clinical reasoning quality of the referring physicians or PET/CT yield, it may limit the contextual information available for interpreting imaging results.