Literature DB >> 14963076

Patient self-referral for radiologic screening tests: clinical and ethical concerns.

Joshua J Fenton1, Richard A Deyo.   

Abstract

Retail marketing of radiologic screening tests is increasingly common in the United States. Without a physician referral, patients can now directly purchase screening computed tomography (CT) or ultrasound scans. In this article, we consider the clinical and ethical ramifications of widespread screening of low-risk populations with 4 commonly marketed tests: whole-body CT, CT-based heart scans, heel ultrasound for osteoporosis, and carotid duplex sonography for carotid stenosis. All the tests are too inaccurate for screening in low-risk populations, and none has been proven to lead to early, beneficial intervention. Screening could be harmful if false-positive tests lead to extensive or invasive diagnostic evaluation. Finally, widespread testing could increase health care costs with little public health benefit. Patients should probably avoid radiologic screening tests until the tests have been appropriately evaluated in controlled studies and recommended by unbiased national panels, such as the United States Preventive Services Task Force. Primary care physicians and their professional societies should emphasize the uncertain benefits and potential hazards of indiscriminate imaging among healthy, asymptomatic consumers.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Health Care and Public Health

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14963076     DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.16.6.494

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Board Fam Pract        ISSN: 0893-8652


  8 in total

1.  Too much of a good thing is wonderful? A conceptual analysis of excessive examinations and diagnostic futility in diagnostic radiology.

Authors:  Bjørn Hofmann
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2010-05

2.  Update on Direct-to-Consumer Marketing in Oncology.

Authors:  Stacy W Gray; Gregory A Abel
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2012-02-21       Impact factor: 3.840

3.  Whole-body computed tomography: a new point of view in a hospital check-up unit? Our experience in 6516 patients.

Authors:  Maite Millor; Pablo Bartolomé; Maria José Pons; Gorka Bastarrika; Óscar Beloqui; David Cano; Ignacio González; Isabel Vivas
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2019-08-12       Impact factor: 3.469

4.  U.S. primary care physicians' lung cancer screening beliefs and recommendations.

Authors:  Carrie N Klabunde; Pamela M Marcus; Gerard A Silvestri; Paul K J Han; Thomas B Richards; Gigi Yuan; Stephen E Marcus; Sally W Vernon
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 5.043

5.  Lung cancer screening practices of primary care physicians: results from a national survey.

Authors:  Carrie N Klabunde; Pamela M Marcus; Paul K J Han; Thomas B Richards; Sally W Vernon; Gigi Yuan; Gerard A Silvestri
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2012 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.166

6.  Benign ancient schwannoma of the abdominal wall: an unwanted birthday present.

Authors:  Ravi K Bhatia; Ayan Banerjea; Manisha Ram; Bryony E Lovett
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2010-01-06       Impact factor: 2.102

7.  The use of CT for screening: a national survey of radiologists' activities and attitudes.

Authors:  Ingrid M Burger; Nancy E Kass; Jonathan H Sunshine; Stanley S Siegelman
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2008-05-15       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  An unwelcome side effect of direct-to-consumer personal genome testing: raiding the medical commons.

Authors:  Amy L McGuire; Wylie Burke
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2008-12-10       Impact factor: 56.272

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.