Literature DB >> 16719997

Abdominal radiograph requesting in the setting of acute abdominal pain: temporal trends and appropriateness of requesting.

G Morris-Stiff1, R E Stiff, H Morris-Stiff.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The biannual turnover of house surgeons has long been dreaded by paramedical staff because of fears of increased workloads generated by 'untrained' junior doctors. The aim of this study was to address this issue by examining both the quantity and quality of requests made for emergency abdominal radiographs made by 'experienced' house surgeons during the month of July and by the 'novices' during August. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All adult patients undergoing abdominal radiography (AXR) following admission as emergencies via the surgical directorate with abdominal signs were identified prospectively. The reports of the AXRs were reviewed to determine the total number of requests and the number of positive findings for the two groups. In addition, the hand-written request forms were recovered to determine the suitability of the requests according to nationally-accepted guidelines produced by the Royal College of Radiologists (RCR).
RESULTS: During the study period, a total of 252 radiographs were performed consisting of 98 in July and 154 in August. The number of unreported films in each month were similar at 11 (11.2%) and 16 (10.4%), respectively, leaving 87 reported radiographs in July and 138 in August. There was no difference in the number of radiographs with positive findings (excluding degenerative spinal disease) for July (n = 19; 22%) and August (n = 33; 24%). Of the 225 reported films, RCR guidelines were followed in only 73 (32%) of 225 cases. When guidelines were adhered to, positive findings were identified in 56 (76.7%) of 73 cases whereas when guidelines were not followed positive findings were seen in only 13/139 (8.9%) of AXRs.
CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated that the popular myth of the 'August syndrome' is unsubstantiated at least using the surrogate marker of abdominal radiograph requests. The worrying finding of a high number of unacceptable indications for the performance of abdominal radiographs deserves urgent attention both in terms of its financial implications and with regards reducing radiation exposure. A programme of education is proposed to emphasise the RCR guidelines with re-audit to assess adherence to the guidelines.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16719997      PMCID: PMC1963673          DOI: 10.1308/003588406X98586

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl        ISSN: 0035-8843            Impact factor:   1.891


  11 in total

1.  The Royal College of Radiologists Multicentre Guideline Study: implications for clinical practice.

Authors:  C J Roberts
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 2.350

Review 2.  Intestinal obstruction role of CT.

Authors:  David Frager
Journal:  Gastroenterol Clin North Am       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 3.806

3.  The plain X-ray in the acute abdomen: a surgeon's evaluation.

Authors:  P W Lee
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1976-10       Impact factor: 6.939

4.  Revised radiation doses for typical X-ray examinations. Report on a recent review of doses to patients from medical X-ray examinations in the UK by NRPB. National Radiological Protection Board.

Authors:  B F Wall; D Hart
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 5.  Towards the more effective use of diagnostic radiology: a review of the work of the Royal College of Radiologists Working Party on the more Effective Use of Diagnostic Radiology, 1976 to 1986.

Authors: 
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  1988-01       Impact factor: 2.350

6.  Plain abdominal radiographs and acute abdominal pain.

Authors:  J P Campbell; A A Gunn
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1988-06       Impact factor: 6.939

7.  Evaluation of plain abdominal radiographs in the diagnosis of abdominal pain.

Authors:  R L Eisenberg; P Heineken; M W Hedgcock; M Federle; H I Goldberg
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1983-04       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Rationalising abdominal radiography in the accident and emergency department.

Authors:  G J de Lacey; B K Wignall; S Bradbrooke; J Reidy; S Hussain; B Cramer
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  1980-07       Impact factor: 2.350

9.  A pilot evaluation of radiography of the acute abdomen.

Authors:  M W Hayward; C Hayward; W P Ennis; C J Roberts
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  1984-07       Impact factor: 2.350

10.  Evaluation of the plain abdominal X-ray in the acute abdomen.

Authors:  M J Stower; S S Amar; T Mikulin; D M Kean; J D Hardcastle
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  1985-08       Impact factor: 5.344

View more
  5 in total

1.  Erect chest radiography in the setting of the acute abdomen: essential tool or an unnecessary waste of resources?

Authors:  S Alazzawi; W Sprenger De Rover; G Morris-Stiff; M H Lewis
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2010-07-21       Impact factor: 1.891

2.  Single-centre experience of radiation exposure in acute surgical patients: assessment of therapeutic impact and future recommendations.

Authors:  Gerard J Fitzmaurice; Robin Brown; Brian Cranley; Enda F Conlon; R Alan J Todd; Mark E O'Donnell
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  Plain abdominal radiography in acute abdominal pain--is it really necessary?

Authors:  Sadhishaan Sreedharan; Mark Fiorentino; Sankar Sinha
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2014-06-01

4.  Abdominal radiographs in the emergency department: current status and controversies.

Authors:  Ashish Chawla; Wilfred C G Peh
Journal:  J Med Radiat Sci       Date:  2018-12

5.  A quality improvement project: Reducing the number of unnecessary plain abdominal radiographs performed in the emergency department of a London district general hospital.

Authors:  Jonathon Kyriakides; Rahul Khamar; Aria Khani; Harman Khatkar
Journal:  J Family Med Prim Care       Date:  2022-01-31
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.