Literature DB >> 17097522

DXA quality matters.

E Michael Lewiecki1, Neil Binkley, Steven M Petak.   

Abstract

The proliferation of devices to measure bone mineral density (BMD), with large numbers of technologists operating these instruments and numerous physicians interpreting/reporting the results, raises concern regarding the quality of the studies. High quality BMD measurement and reporting is essential, since referring healthcare providers rely on these reports to make patient care decisions that include additional medical evaluation (laboratory or imaging tests), drug therapy (starting, stopping, or changing), and possibly referral to an osteoporosis specialist. Incorrect BMD acquisition or reporting may generate unnecessary medical expenses and result in therapeutic decisions that could be harmful to patients. Contrary to the common misperception that BMD measurement and interpretation is a simple procedure requiring no special expertise, densitometer maintenance/operation, data acquisition, and interpretation/reporting of the results are skills that must be acquired and maintained. We recommend that technologists and clinicians involved with performing or interpreting BMD tests be educated and trained in bone densitometry and that they update their skills regularly. We also suggest that they provide demonstration of proficiency in bone densitometry in order to assure patients, referring healthcare providers, and payers of medical services that these skills have been acquired and maintained.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17097522     DOI: 10.1016/j.jocd.2006.07.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Densitom        ISSN: 1094-6950            Impact factor:   2.617


  15 in total

1.  Bone density testing intervals and common sense.

Authors:  E Michael Lewiecki; Neil Binkley
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 5.096

2.  Evaluation of the patient positioning during DXA measurements in daily clinical practice.

Authors:  Alp Cetin; Erkan Ozgüçlü; Levent Ozçakar; Ayşen Akinci
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2007-10-27       Impact factor: 2.980

3.  Letter to the Editor.

Authors:  Klaus Engelke; Tony M Keaveny
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-06-06       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 4.  Imaging technologies for assessment of skeletal health in men.

Authors:  E Michael Lewiecki
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 5.096

Review 5.  Bone densitometry and vertebral fracture assessment.

Authors:  E Michael Lewiecki
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 5.096

6.  Monitoring osteoporosis therapies.

Authors:  Paul D Miller
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 5.096

7.  Positioner and clothing artifact can affect one-third radius bone mineral density measurement.

Authors:  Diane Krueger; Nellie Vallarta-Ast; Jessie Libber; Mary Checovich; Ronald Gangnon; Neil Binkley
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2012-06-01       Impact factor: 2.617

Review 8.  Osteoporosis: Treat-to-Target.

Authors:  E Michael Lewiecki
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 5.096

Review 9.  Common mistakes in the clinical use of bone mineral density testing.

Authors:  E Michael Lewiecki; Nancy E Lane
Journal:  Nat Clin Pract Rheumatol       Date:  2008-10-21

10.  Osteoporosis care at risk in the United States.

Authors:  E M Lewiecki; S Baim; E S Siris
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2008-08-29       Impact factor: 4.507

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.