Literature DB >> 12583453

The reliability of assessing the appropriateness of requested diagnostic tests.

Rianne Bindels1, Arie Hasman, Jan W J van Wersch, Peter Pop, Ron A G Winkens.   

Abstract

Despite a poor reliability, peer assessment is the traditional method to assess the appropriateness of health care activities. This article describes the reliability of the human assessment of the appropriateness of diagnostic tests requests. The authors used a random selection of 1217 tests from 253 request forms submitted by general practitioners in the Maastricht region of The Netherlands. Three reviewers independently assessed the appropriateness of each requested test. Interrater kappa values ranged from 0.33 to 0.42, and kappa values of intrarater agreement ranged from 0.48 to 0.68. The joint reliability coefficient of the 3 reviewers was 0.66. This reliability is sufficient to review test ordering over a series of cases but is not sufficient to make case-by-case assessments. Sixteen reviewers are needed to obtain a joint reliability of 0.95. The authors conclude that there is substantial variation in assessment concerning what is an appropriately requested diagnostic test and that this feedback method is not reliable enough to make a case-by-case assessment. Computer support maybe beneficial to support and make the process of peer review more uniform.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12583453     DOI: 10.1177/0272989X02239647

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.583


  3 in total

1.  Measuring the impact of diagnostic decision support on the quality of clinical decision making: development of a reliable and valid composite score.

Authors:  Padmanabhan Ramnarayan; Ritika R Kapoor; Michael Coren; Vasantha Nanduri; Amanda L Tomlinson; Paul M Taylor; Jeremy C Wyatt; Joseph F Britto
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2003-08-04       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  Evidence-based imaging guidelines and Medicare payment policy.

Authors:  Christopher L Sistrom; Niccie L McKay
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Appropriateness: analysis of outpatient radiology requests.

Authors:  M Cristofaro; E Busi Rizzi; V Schininà; D Chiappetta; C Angeletti; C Bibbolino
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2011-09-02       Impact factor: 3.469

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.