Literature DB >> 20532939

A comparison of test-ordering choices of college physicians and emergency physicians for young adults with abdominal pain: influences and preferences for CT use.

Stephen R Baker1, Paul H Susman, Lucas Sheen, Lawrence Pan.   

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare through questionnaires the test-ordering behavior of college health professionals and emergency physicians with respect to the choosing of computed tomography scans under two clinical scenarios-suspicion of appendicitis and nondescript abdominal pain. Surveys were sent to physician members of both the American College Health Association and the American College of Emergency Physicians. The recipients were asked if their initial workup would include a computed tomography (CT) scan for either clinical scenario. They were queried on their estimation of the importance of physical examination findings, practice standards, economic considerations, and interpersonal factors on the decision to obtain a CT. They were also asked if their decision to order a CT was related to physical exam findings, parental influence, established protocol, costs to student, insurance considerations, medical literature recommendations, and relationship with radiologist. For the first presentation, a clinical suspicion of appendicitis, there was little difference between the choices of the two groups. Seventy seven percent of the college health professionals would obtain one and 76% of the ER physicians would do the same. However, for the workup of nondescript pain, three times as many ER physicians as college health professionals would obtain a CT scan (34% vs 11%). Of the seven factors, the most important determinant for both groups of physicians was the results of physical exam and least important by far was the relationship to the radiologist.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20532939     DOI: 10.1007/s10140-010-0881-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Emerg Radiol        ISSN: 1070-3004


  10 in total

1.  The radiologist's conundrum: benefits and costs of increasing CT capacity and utilization.

Authors:  Giles W L Boland; Alexander S Guimaraes; Peter R Mueller
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-09-03       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Understanding geographic variations in health care delivery.

Authors:  J E Wennberg
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1999-01-07       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Estimated risks of radiation-induced fatal cancer from pediatric CT.

Authors:  D Brenner; C Elliston; E Hall; W Berdon
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 3.959

4.  Pelvic pain: lessons from anatomy and physiology.

Authors:  J Abbott
Journal:  J Emerg Med       Date:  1990 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.484

5.  Increasing utilization of computed tomography in the adult emergency department, 2000-2005.

Authors:  Joshua Broder; David M Warshauer
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2006-08-10

6.  Availability and quality of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging equipment in U.S. emergency departments.

Authors:  Adit A Ginde; Anthony Foianini; Daniel M Renner; Morgan Valley; Carlos A Camargo
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 3.451

7.  National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 2005 emergency department summary.

Authors:  Eric W Nawar; Richard W Niska; Jianmin Xu
Journal:  Adv Data       Date:  2007-06-29

8.  Increasing utilization of computed tomography in the pediatric emergency department, 2000-2006.

Authors:  Joshua Broder; Lynn Ansley Fordham; David M Warshauer
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2007-05-16

9.  Misdiagnosis of appendicitis in nonpregnant women of childbearing age.

Authors:  S G Rothrock; S M Green; M Dobson; S A Colucciello; C M Simmons
Journal:  J Emerg Med       Date:  1995 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.484

Review 10.  Computed tomography and radiation risks: what pediatric health care providers should know.

Authors:  Donald P Frush; Lane F Donnelly; Nancy S Rosen
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 7.124

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.