AIM: To provide information about the diagnostic and therapeutic impact of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and to compare the findings across diagnostic groups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, observational study of 2017 consecutive referrals for MRI of the head, spine or knee at four imaging centres. Clinicians completed questionnaires before MRI stating initial diagnoses, diagnostic confidence and treatment plans. After imaging, a second questionnaire evaluated clinicians' revised diagnosis and treatment plans in the light of imaging findings. Patients were grouped into nine diagnostic categories for analysis. Comparison between pre- and post-imaging was used to assess the diagnostic and therapeutic impact of MRI. RESULTS: In seven of nine diagnostic groups MRI findings were associated with a diagnostic impact. Diagnoses were revised or discarded following normal MR findings and diagnostic confidence was increased by confirmative MR findings. There was no statistically significant diagnostic impact for suspected pituitary or cerebello-pontine angle lesions. In five of nine diagnostic groups (knee meniscus, knee ligament, multiple sclerosis, lumbar and cervical spine) MRI findings had a clear impact on treatment plans. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that in most diagnostic categories, MRI influences diagnosis and treatment. However, experimental studies are needed to prove that these diagnostic and therapeutic impacts lead to improved health.Hollingworth (2000). Clinical Radiology55, 825-831. Copyright 2000 The Royal College of Radiologists.
AIM: To provide information about the diagnostic and therapeutic impact of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and to compare the findings across diagnostic groups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, observational study of 2017 consecutive referrals for MRI of the head, spine or knee at four imaging centres. Clinicians completed questionnaires before MRI stating initial diagnoses, diagnostic confidence and treatment plans. After imaging, a second questionnaire evaluated clinicians' revised diagnosis and treatment plans in the light of imaging findings. Patients were grouped into nine diagnostic categories for analysis. Comparison between pre- and post-imaging was used to assess the diagnostic and therapeutic impact of MRI. RESULTS: In seven of nine diagnostic groups MRI findings were associated with a diagnostic impact. Diagnoses were revised or discarded following normal MR findings and diagnostic confidence was increased by confirmative MR findings. There was no statistically significant diagnostic impact for suspected pituitary or cerebello-pontine angle lesions. In five of nine diagnostic groups (knee meniscus, knee ligament, multiple sclerosis, lumbar and cervical spine) MRI findings had a clear impact on treatment plans. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that in most diagnostic categories, MRI influences diagnosis and treatment. However, experimental studies are needed to prove that these diagnostic and therapeutic impacts lead to improved health.Hollingworth (2000). Clinical Radiology55, 825-831. Copyright 2000 The Royal College of Radiologists.
Authors: Sanne van Erp; Ece Ercan; Perla Breedveld; Lianne Brakenhoff; Eidrees Ghariq; Sophie Schmid; Matthias van Osch; Mark van Buchem; Bart Emmer; Jeroen van der Grond; Ron Wolterbeek; Daniel Hommes; Herma Fidder; Nic van der Wee; Tom Huizinga; Désirée van der Heijde; Huub Middelkoop; Itamar Ronen; Andrea van der Meulen-de Jong Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2017-02-14 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: R M L Warren; L G Bobrow; H M Earl; P D Britton; D Gopalan; A D Purushotham; G C Wishart; J R Benson; W Hollingworth Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2004-04-05 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Michał Dzięcioł; Przemysław Podgórski; Ewa Stańczyk; Antoni Szumny; Martyna Woszczyło; Barbara Pieczewska; Wojciech Niżański; Józef Nicpoń; Marcin Adam Wrzosek Journal: Front Vet Sci Date: 2020-03-24