使用循证影像学转诊指南促进适当的影像学检查:它们都是一样的吗?

IF 3.9 3区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING European Journal of Radiology Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-18 DOI:10.1016/j.ejrad.2025.111933
Yi Xiang Tay , Shane J. Foley , Marcus EH Ong , Robert Chun Chen , Lai Peng Chan , Ronan Killeen , Eu Jin Tan , May San Mak , Jonathan P. McNulty
{"title":"使用循证影像学转诊指南促进适当的影像学检查:它们都是一样的吗?","authors":"Yi Xiang Tay ,&nbsp;Shane J. Foley ,&nbsp;Marcus EH Ong ,&nbsp;Robert Chun Chen ,&nbsp;Lai Peng Chan ,&nbsp;Ronan Killeen ,&nbsp;Eu Jin Tan ,&nbsp;May San Mak ,&nbsp;Jonathan P. McNulty","doi":"10.1016/j.ejrad.2025.111933","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Rationale and Objectives</h3><div>Countries worldwide have selected, adopted, adapted, and translated evidence-based imaging referral guidelines from radiology professional bodies. This study establishes the concordance of three imaging referral guidelines from the ACR, ESR, and RCR, and examines the emergency department cervical spine imaging appropriateness rates.</div></div><div><h3>Materials and Methods</h3><div>A retrospective analysis of the electronic medical records was performed between October 1st to December 31st, 2022, evaluating 452 radiography and 153 CT imaging referrals. For each case, the initial clinical diagnosis was integrated with the corresponding clinical notes for analysis. Evaluation of the appropriateness rating was dichotomised to either ‘indicated’ or ‘not indicated’ for analytical and practical purposes. The inter-rater agreement for the imaging referral guidelines was calculated using Fleiss’ Kappa and Cohen’s Kappa.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The overall appropriateness rate of X-ray cervical spine imaging referrals was 13.3 % −75.2 %, depending on the imaging referral guidelines utilised. The appropriateness rate of CT cervical spine was 90.8 %, which was an identical rate for all three of the guidelines. Fleiss’ Kappa indicated the guidelines for X-ray of the cervical spine had slight agreement (κ = 0.135 (95 % CI, 0.088 to 0.183), p &lt; 0.001) and almost perfect agreement amongst guidelines for CT cervical spine (κ = 1.000 (95 % CI, 0.909 to 1.091), p &lt; 0.001). For pairwise comparison, ACR AC and ESR iGuide for X-ray demonstrated moderate agreement (κ = 0.765, p &lt; 0.001); however, RCR iRefer had no level of agreement with both. For CT, there was almost perfect agreement between all the guidelines.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The guidelines demonstrated slight agreement for X-ray cervical spine and almost perfect agreement for CT cervical spine, complicating audit process and influencing audit output. Multidisciplinary buy-in positively impacts CT cervical spine appropriateness rates. Harmonising and prioritising guideline development for commonly encountered clinical scenarios is required.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12063,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Radiology","volume":"183 ","pages":"Article 111933"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using evidence-based imaging referral guidelines to facilitate appropriate imaging: Are they all the same?\",\"authors\":\"Yi Xiang Tay ,&nbsp;Shane J. Foley ,&nbsp;Marcus EH Ong ,&nbsp;Robert Chun Chen ,&nbsp;Lai Peng Chan ,&nbsp;Ronan Killeen ,&nbsp;Eu Jin Tan ,&nbsp;May San Mak ,&nbsp;Jonathan P. McNulty\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ejrad.2025.111933\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Rationale and Objectives</h3><div>Countries worldwide have selected, adopted, adapted, and translated evidence-based imaging referral guidelines from radiology professional bodies. This study establishes the concordance of three imaging referral guidelines from the ACR, ESR, and RCR, and examines the emergency department cervical spine imaging appropriateness rates.</div></div><div><h3>Materials and Methods</h3><div>A retrospective analysis of the electronic medical records was performed between October 1st to December 31st, 2022, evaluating 452 radiography and 153 CT imaging referrals. For each case, the initial clinical diagnosis was integrated with the corresponding clinical notes for analysis. Evaluation of the appropriateness rating was dichotomised to either ‘indicated’ or ‘not indicated’ for analytical and practical purposes. The inter-rater agreement for the imaging referral guidelines was calculated using Fleiss’ Kappa and Cohen’s Kappa.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The overall appropriateness rate of X-ray cervical spine imaging referrals was 13.3 % −75.2 %, depending on the imaging referral guidelines utilised. The appropriateness rate of CT cervical spine was 90.8 %, which was an identical rate for all three of the guidelines. Fleiss’ Kappa indicated the guidelines for X-ray of the cervical spine had slight agreement (κ = 0.135 (95 % CI, 0.088 to 0.183), p &lt; 0.001) and almost perfect agreement amongst guidelines for CT cervical spine (κ = 1.000 (95 % CI, 0.909 to 1.091), p &lt; 0.001). For pairwise comparison, ACR AC and ESR iGuide for X-ray demonstrated moderate agreement (κ = 0.765, p &lt; 0.001); however, RCR iRefer had no level of agreement with both. For CT, there was almost perfect agreement between all the guidelines.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The guidelines demonstrated slight agreement for X-ray cervical spine and almost perfect agreement for CT cervical spine, complicating audit process and influencing audit output. Multidisciplinary buy-in positively impacts CT cervical spine appropriateness rates. Harmonising and prioritising guideline development for commonly encountered clinical scenarios is required.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12063,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Radiology\",\"volume\":\"183 \",\"pages\":\"Article 111933\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0720048X25000191\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0720048X25000191","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

理由和目标:世界各国已经选择、采用、改编和翻译了来自放射学专业机构的循证影像学转诊指南。本研究建立了ACR、ESR和RCR三种影像学转诊指南的一致性,并检查了急诊科颈椎影像学的适当率。材料与方法:回顾性分析2022年10月1日至12月31日期间的电子病历,对452例x线摄影和153例CT影像学转诊进行评估。对于每个病例,将初步临床诊断与相应的临床笔记相结合进行分析。为了分析和实际目的,适当性评级的评估分为“指示”或“未指示”。使用Fleiss Kappa和Cohen Kappa计算影像学转诊指南的评分间一致性。结果:根据所采用的影像学转诊指南,x线颈椎影像学转诊的总体适宜率为13.3% - 75.2%。CT颈椎的合适率为90.8%,三者的合适率相同。Fleiss’Kappa指出,颈椎x线检查指南有轻微的一致性(κ = 0.135 (95% CI, 0.088 ~ 0.183), p结论:颈椎x线检查指南有轻微的一致性,而颈椎CT检查指南几乎完全一致,使审计过程复杂化,影响审计结果。多学科介入正影响CT颈椎合适率。需要针对常见的临床情况协调和优先制定指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Using evidence-based imaging referral guidelines to facilitate appropriate imaging: Are they all the same?

Rationale and Objectives

Countries worldwide have selected, adopted, adapted, and translated evidence-based imaging referral guidelines from radiology professional bodies. This study establishes the concordance of three imaging referral guidelines from the ACR, ESR, and RCR, and examines the emergency department cervical spine imaging appropriateness rates.

Materials and Methods

A retrospective analysis of the electronic medical records was performed between October 1st to December 31st, 2022, evaluating 452 radiography and 153 CT imaging referrals. For each case, the initial clinical diagnosis was integrated with the corresponding clinical notes for analysis. Evaluation of the appropriateness rating was dichotomised to either ‘indicated’ or ‘not indicated’ for analytical and practical purposes. The inter-rater agreement for the imaging referral guidelines was calculated using Fleiss’ Kappa and Cohen’s Kappa.

Results

The overall appropriateness rate of X-ray cervical spine imaging referrals was 13.3 % −75.2 %, depending on the imaging referral guidelines utilised. The appropriateness rate of CT cervical spine was 90.8 %, which was an identical rate for all three of the guidelines. Fleiss’ Kappa indicated the guidelines for X-ray of the cervical spine had slight agreement (κ = 0.135 (95 % CI, 0.088 to 0.183), p < 0.001) and almost perfect agreement amongst guidelines for CT cervical spine (κ = 1.000 (95 % CI, 0.909 to 1.091), p < 0.001). For pairwise comparison, ACR AC and ESR iGuide for X-ray demonstrated moderate agreement (κ = 0.765, p < 0.001); however, RCR iRefer had no level of agreement with both. For CT, there was almost perfect agreement between all the guidelines.

Conclusion

The guidelines demonstrated slight agreement for X-ray cervical spine and almost perfect agreement for CT cervical spine, complicating audit process and influencing audit output. Multidisciplinary buy-in positively impacts CT cervical spine appropriateness rates. Harmonising and prioritising guideline development for commonly encountered clinical scenarios is required.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
3.00%
发文量
398
审稿时长
42 days
期刊介绍: European Journal of Radiology is an international journal which aims to communicate to its readers, state-of-the-art information on imaging developments in the form of high quality original research articles and timely reviews on current developments in the field. Its audience includes clinicians at all levels of training including radiology trainees, newly qualified imaging specialists and the experienced radiologist. Its aim is to inform efficient, appropriate and evidence-based imaging practice to the benefit of patients worldwide.
期刊最新文献
Topological imaging of single-cell CAF heterogeneity for predicting prognosis and adjuvant chemotherapy benefit in pancreatic cancer Assessment of treatment response in recurrent medulloblastoma using craniospinal MRI Deep learning for subtype classification of inner ear malformations on temporal bone HRCT: Development and multicenter validation Validation of an AI‑Assisted Open‑Source software (CoreSlicer) for CT‑Based body composition analysis in locally advanced gastric Cancer: A Comparative study with SliceOmatic Validation of AI-derived whole prostate volumetry versus ellipsoid formula for PSA density-based risk stratification
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1