Literature DB >> 16226194

ACCF/ASNC appropriateness criteria for single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging (SPECT MPI): a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Quality Strategic Directions Committee Appropriateness Criteria Working Group and the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology endorsed by the American Heart Association.

Ralph G Brindis, Pamela S Douglas, Robert C Hendel, Eric D Peterson, Michael J Wolk, Joseph M Allen, Manesh R Patel, Ira E Raskin, Robert C Hendel, Timothy M Bateman, Manuel D Cerqueira, Raymond J Gibbons, Linda D Gillam, John A Gillespie, Robert C Hendel, Ami E Iskandrian, Scott D Jerome, Harlan M Krumholz, Joseph V Messer, John A Spertus, Stephen A Stowers.   

Abstract

Under the auspices of the American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF) and the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology (ASNC), an appropriateness review was conducted for radionuclide cardiovascular imaging (RNI), specifically gated single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging (SPECT MPI). The review assessed the risks and benefits of the imaging test for several indications or clinical scenarios and scored them based on a scale of 1 to 9, where the upper range (7 to 9) implies that the test is generally acceptable and is a reasonable approach, and the lower range (1 to 3) implies that the test is generally not acceptable and is not a reasonable approach. The mid range (4 to 6) implies that the test may be generally acceptable and may be a reasonable approach for the indication. The indications for this review were primarily drawn from existing clinical practice guidelines and modified based on discussion by the ACCF Appropriateness Criteria Working Group and the Technical Panel members who rated the indications. The method for this review was based on the RAND/UCLA approach for evaluating appropriateness, which blends scientific evidence and practice experience. A modified Delphi technique was used to obtain first- and second-round ratings of 52 clinical indications. The ratings were done by a Technical Panel with diverse membership, including nuclear cardiologists, referring physicians (including an echocardiographer), health services researchers, and a payer (chief medical officer). These results are expected to have a significant impact on physician decision making and performance, reimbursement policy, and future research directions. Periodic assessment and updating of criteria will be undertaken as needed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16226194     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2005.08.029

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol        ISSN: 0735-1097            Impact factor:   24.094


  95 in total

1.  The impact of ordering provider specialty on appropriateness classification.

Authors:  Damita Jo Carryer; J Wells Askew; David Hodge; Todd D Miller; Raymond J Gibbons
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 2.  Radiation dose reduction in CT coronary angiography.

Authors:  Brian P Shapiro; Phillip M Young; Birgit Kantor; Yeon Hyeon Choe; Cynthia H McCollough; Thomas C Gerber
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.931

3.  2009 ASNC keynote lecture: measuring cost, cost-effectiveness, and quality in cardiovascular imaging.

Authors:  Robert O Bonow
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 5.952

4.  Prognostic implications of stress Tc-99m tetrofosmin myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy.

Authors:  Abdou Elhendy; Arend F L Schinkel; Ron T van Domburg; Jeroen J Bax; Harm H H Feringa; Peter G Noordzij; Olaf Schouten; Don Poldermans
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 5.952

5.  Revascularize only for ischemia, especially if left ventricular function is poor.

Authors:  Mark I Travin
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 6.  Role of nuclear imaging after coronary revascularization.

Authors:  George L Adams; Srivani R Ambati; John M Adams; Salvador Borges-Neto
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2006 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.952

7.  Monitoring effectiveness of medical therapy in 2006.

Authors:  Ronald G Schwartz; Mark A Kudes
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2006 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.952

8.  What is the government doing to cardiology?

Authors:  Marlon G Ramilo; Gerald M Pohost
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 2.931

9.  Reduction in industry support for academic research: implications for assessment of cardiovascular imaging technologies.

Authors:  George A Beller
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 10.  Imaging the myocardial ischemic cascade.

Authors:  Arthur E Stillman; Matthijs Oudkerk; David A Bluemke; Menko Jan de Boer; Jens Bremerich; Ernest V Garcia; Matthias Gutberlet; Pim van der Harst; W Gregory Hundley; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Dirkjan Kuijpers; Raymond Y Kwong; Eike Nagel; Stamatios Lerakis; John Oshinski; Jean-François Paul; Riemer H J A Slart; Vinod Thourani; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; Bernd J Wintersperger
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2018-03-19       Impact factor: 2.357

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.