Objective: To retrospectively analyse the use of imaging studies in the Emergency Department of community hospitals using evidence based guidelines and clinical judgement. Methods: Medical records of 661 patients who ...Objective: To retrospectively analyse the use of imaging studies in the Emergency Department of community hospitals using evidence based guidelines and clinical judgement. Methods: Medical records of 661 patients who visited the Emergency Department (ED) in 2015 and underwent imaging studies were reviewed. The Canadian Association of Radiologists, American College of Radiologists and Choosing Wisely Canada guidelines were used to determine the appropriateness of imaging studies. The use of prior patient imaging, the rate at which studies were repeated and the respective impacts on patient management of the imaging studies were also examined. Results: Of the 1056 imaging studies reviewed, 228 (22%) were found to be clinical situations where no imaging study was indicated while 168 (16%) were considered a suboptimal choice of imaging study or modality. When no study was recommended, a positive impact on the diagnosis was noted in 105 (46%) cases and on patient management 83 (36%) times. Notably, 219 (21%) patients had a relevant examination performed in the last 30 days, and 147 (14%) reports noted that the results of the prior study also concurred with the imaging study evaluated. Conclusion: In this study, 228 (22%) radiographs and CT studies, excluding MVC related imaging and extremity imaging, were not indicated based on appropriateness criteria and consequently had a limited impact on patient management. This supports the need for increased clinical decision support for ED physicians, regional health information exchanges and consideration of Computerized Physician Order Entry in the ED with embedded appropriateness criteria at the point of ordering.展开更多
文摘Objective: To retrospectively analyse the use of imaging studies in the Emergency Department of community hospitals using evidence based guidelines and clinical judgement. Methods: Medical records of 661 patients who visited the Emergency Department (ED) in 2015 and underwent imaging studies were reviewed. The Canadian Association of Radiologists, American College of Radiologists and Choosing Wisely Canada guidelines were used to determine the appropriateness of imaging studies. The use of prior patient imaging, the rate at which studies were repeated and the respective impacts on patient management of the imaging studies were also examined. Results: Of the 1056 imaging studies reviewed, 228 (22%) were found to be clinical situations where no imaging study was indicated while 168 (16%) were considered a suboptimal choice of imaging study or modality. When no study was recommended, a positive impact on the diagnosis was noted in 105 (46%) cases and on patient management 83 (36%) times. Notably, 219 (21%) patients had a relevant examination performed in the last 30 days, and 147 (14%) reports noted that the results of the prior study also concurred with the imaging study evaluated. Conclusion: In this study, 228 (22%) radiographs and CT studies, excluding MVC related imaging and extremity imaging, were not indicated based on appropriateness criteria and consequently had a limited impact on patient management. This supports the need for increased clinical decision support for ED physicians, regional health information exchanges and consideration of Computerized Physician Order Entry in the ED with embedded appropriateness criteria at the point of ordering.
