Literature DB >> 1995119

Magnetic resonance imaging of the head and spine: effective for the clinician or the patient?

A K Dixon1, J P Southern, A Teale, C E Freer, L D Hall, A Williams, C Sims.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To test how the results of magnetic resonance imaging influence clinicians' diagnoses and management plans for patients with cranial and spinal problems and to assess changes in the quality of life of these patients.
DESIGN: Survey of patients undergoing cranial and spinal magnetic resonance imaging with questionnaires about diagnoses and intended management plans before and after imaging and quality of life questionnaires at the time of imaging and again four months later.
SETTING: Regional magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy unit.
SUBJECTS: 100 consecutive patients referred for cranial imaging in early 1989; 100 similar patients referred for spinal imaging. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in clinicians' leading diagnoses after magnetic resonance imaging and their confidence in these diagnoses; changes in intended management plans; assessment of the contribution to the future management of the patient; changes in patients' quality of life.
RESULTS: Magnetic resonance imaging altered the clinicians' leading diagnoses in 35 of 169 (21%) cases. The clinicians became more confident about their leading diagnoses in 90 of 167 (54%). There was a change in management plan in 113 of 182 (62%). The clinicians considered that magnetic resonance imaging made an important contribution to management in 119 of 162 (73%) patients. Overall, the patients' quality of life was unchanged at the four month assessment.
CONCLUSIONS: Magnetic resonance imaging of patients with cranial and spinal problems influences clinicians' diagnoses and management plans, but the quality of life of these patients remains unchanged.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1995119      PMCID: PMC1668894          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.302.6768.79

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  11 in total

1.  Procedures for evaluating innovatory proposals.

Authors:  A S St Leger; D Allen; R V Rowsell
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1989-10-21

2.  The state of outcome research: are we on target?

Authors:  S Greenfield
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1989-04-27       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  The assessment of MR imaging.

Authors:  B J Hillman
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1988-11       Impact factor: 3.959

4.  The poor quality of early evaluations of MR imaging: a reply.

Authors:  W P Shuman
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1988-11       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Impact of MR imaging on clinical diagnosis and management: a prospective study.

Authors:  E A Franken; K S Berbaum; V Dunn; W L Smith; J C Ehrhardt; G S Levitz; R E Breckenridge
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1986-11       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Comparison of CT and MR in 400 patients with suspected disease of the brain and cervical spinal cord.

Authors:  B J Hillman
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  1986-03       Impact factor: 6.016

7.  Computed tomography in patients with an abdominal mass: effective and efficient? A controlled trial.

Authors:  A K Dixon; I K Fry; J G Kingham; A M McLean; F E White
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1981-05-30       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography in suspected lesions in the posterior cranial fossa.

Authors:  G M Teasdale; D M Hadley; A Lawrence; I Bone; H Burton; R Grant; B Condon; P Macpherson; J Rowan
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1989-08-05

Review 9.  Magnetic resonance imaging of the brain and spine. Is clinical efficacy established after the first decade?

Authors:  D L Kent; E B Larson
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1988-03       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Cost-benefit evaluation of body computed tomography.

Authors:  A T Moore; A K Dixon; D Rubenstein; T Wheeler
Journal:  Health Trends       Date:  1987-08
View more
  10 in total

1.  Reprocessing data to form QALYs.

Authors:  J Coast
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1992-07-11

2.  Developing the QALY concept: exploring the problems of data acquisition.

Authors:  J Coast
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Current practice in obtaining the "Q" in QALYs: a cautionary note.

Authors:  R A Carr-Hill; J Morris
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1991-09-21

4.  The "Q" in QALYs.

Authors:  R Carr-Hill; J Morris
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1991-12-07

Review 5.  Imaging the adult brain.

Authors:  I Moseley
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 10.154

Review 6.  Quality of life assessments in the evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  R Mackenzie; W Hollingworth; A K Dixon
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Measuring changes in quality of life following magnetic resonance imaging of the knee: SF-36, EuroQol or Rosser index?

Authors:  W Hollingworth; R Mackenzie; C J Todd; A K Dixon
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Health-related quality of life in endstage renal failure.

Authors:  C M Gudex
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  Cancer imaging - the significance of the findings.

Authors:  R H Reznek
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2000-10-09       Impact factor: 3.909

10.  Cost effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging in the neurosciences.

Authors:  A K Szczepura; J Fletcher; J D Fitz-Patrick
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1991-12-07
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.