Melissa J.A. Steffen , Kimberly D. McCoy , Michelle A. Mengeling , Karla L. Miller , Heather Davila , Shylo E. Wardyn , Amal Shibli-Rahhal , Irfan Farukhi Bone Densitometry Survey Work Group , Samantha L. Solimeo
{"title":"综合医疗保健系统内骨密度测量评估流程全国调查","authors":"Melissa J.A. Steffen , Kimberly D. McCoy , Michelle A. Mengeling , Karla L. Miller , Heather Davila , Shylo E. Wardyn , Amal Shibli-Rahhal , Irfan Farukhi Bone Densitometry Survey Work Group , Samantha L. Solimeo","doi":"10.1016/j.jocd.2023.101459","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><em>Background</em><span>: To assess the current state of bone mineral density evaluation services via dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) provided to Veterans with fracture risk through the development and administration of a nationwide survey of facilities in the Veterans Health Administration.</span></p><p><em>Methodology</em><span>: The Bone Densitometry Survey was developed by convening a Work Group of individuals with expertise in bone densitometry and engaging the Work Group in an iterative drafting and revision process. Once completed, the survey was beta tested, administered through REDCap, and sent via e-mail to points of contact at 178 VHA facilities.</span></p><p><em>Results</em>: Facility response rate was 31 % (56/178). Most DXA centers reported positively to markers of readiness for their bone densitometers: less than 10 years old (n=35; 63 %); in “excellent” or “good” condition (n=44; 78 %, 32 % and 46 %, respectively); and perform phantom calibration (n=43; 77 %). Forty-one DXA centers (73 %) use intake processes that have been shown to reduce errors. Thirty-seven DXA centers (66 %) reported their technologists receive specialized training in DXA, while 14 (25 %) indicated they receive accredited training. Seventeen DXA centers (30 %) reported performing routine precision assessment.</p><p><em>Conclusions</em>: Many DXA centers reported using practices that meet minimal standards for DXA reporting and preparation; however, the lack of standardization, even within an integrated healthcare system, indicates an opportunity for quality improvement to ensure consistent high quality bone mineral density evaluation of Veterans.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50240,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Densitometry","volume":"27 1","pages":"Article 101459"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"National Survey of the Bone Densitometry Evaluation Process Within an Integrated Healthcare System\",\"authors\":\"Melissa J.A. Steffen , Kimberly D. McCoy , Michelle A. Mengeling , Karla L. Miller , Heather Davila , Shylo E. Wardyn , Amal Shibli-Rahhal , Irfan Farukhi Bone Densitometry Survey Work Group , Samantha L. Solimeo\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jocd.2023.101459\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><em>Background</em><span>: To assess the current state of bone mineral density evaluation services via dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) provided to Veterans with fracture risk through the development and administration of a nationwide survey of facilities in the Veterans Health Administration.</span></p><p><em>Methodology</em><span>: The Bone Densitometry Survey was developed by convening a Work Group of individuals with expertise in bone densitometry and engaging the Work Group in an iterative drafting and revision process. Once completed, the survey was beta tested, administered through REDCap, and sent via e-mail to points of contact at 178 VHA facilities.</span></p><p><em>Results</em>: Facility response rate was 31 % (56/178). Most DXA centers reported positively to markers of readiness for their bone densitometers: less than 10 years old (n=35; 63 %); in “excellent” or “good” condition (n=44; 78 %, 32 % and 46 %, respectively); and perform phantom calibration (n=43; 77 %). Forty-one DXA centers (73 %) use intake processes that have been shown to reduce errors. Thirty-seven DXA centers (66 %) reported their technologists receive specialized training in DXA, while 14 (25 %) indicated they receive accredited training. Seventeen DXA centers (30 %) reported performing routine precision assessment.</p><p><em>Conclusions</em>: Many DXA centers reported using practices that meet minimal standards for DXA reporting and preparation; however, the lack of standardization, even within an integrated healthcare system, indicates an opportunity for quality improvement to ensure consistent high quality bone mineral density evaluation of Veterans.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50240,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Densitometry\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 101459\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Densitometry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1094695023001099\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Densitometry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1094695023001099","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
National Survey of the Bone Densitometry Evaluation Process Within an Integrated Healthcare System
Background: To assess the current state of bone mineral density evaluation services via dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) provided to Veterans with fracture risk through the development and administration of a nationwide survey of facilities in the Veterans Health Administration.
Methodology: The Bone Densitometry Survey was developed by convening a Work Group of individuals with expertise in bone densitometry and engaging the Work Group in an iterative drafting and revision process. Once completed, the survey was beta tested, administered through REDCap, and sent via e-mail to points of contact at 178 VHA facilities.
Results: Facility response rate was 31 % (56/178). Most DXA centers reported positively to markers of readiness for their bone densitometers: less than 10 years old (n=35; 63 %); in “excellent” or “good” condition (n=44; 78 %, 32 % and 46 %, respectively); and perform phantom calibration (n=43; 77 %). Forty-one DXA centers (73 %) use intake processes that have been shown to reduce errors. Thirty-seven DXA centers (66 %) reported their technologists receive specialized training in DXA, while 14 (25 %) indicated they receive accredited training. Seventeen DXA centers (30 %) reported performing routine precision assessment.
Conclusions: Many DXA centers reported using practices that meet minimal standards for DXA reporting and preparation; however, the lack of standardization, even within an integrated healthcare system, indicates an opportunity for quality improvement to ensure consistent high quality bone mineral density evaluation of Veterans.
期刊介绍:
The Journal is committed to serving ISCD''s mission - the education of heterogenous physician specialties and technologists who are involved in the clinical assessment of skeletal health. The focus of JCD is bone mass measurement, including epidemiology of bone mass, how drugs and diseases alter bone mass, new techniques and quality assurance in bone mass imaging technologies, and bone mass health/economics.
Combining high quality research and review articles with sound, practice-oriented advice, JCD meets the diverse diagnostic and management needs of radiologists, endocrinologists, nephrologists, rheumatologists, gynecologists, family physicians, internists, and technologists whose patients require diagnostic clinical densitometry for therapeutic management.