Literature DB >> 23433927

Appropriate use criteria for stress echocardiography: impact of updated criteria on appropriateness ratings, correlation with pre-authorization guidelines, and effect of temporal trends and an educational initiative on utilization.

Howard J Willens1, Katarina Nelson, Robert C Hendel.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated utilization of stress echocardiography (SE) at our institution, the impact of the updated 2011 appropriate use criteria (AUC) on appropriateness ratings, correlation of AUC to radiology benefits managers' (RBM) pre-certification guidelines and the effect of temporal trends and an AUC-based educational project on appropriateness.
BACKGROUND: The AUC for SE have been developed to improve efficiency of utilization and promote optimal patient care.
METHODS: We classified the appropriateness of 209 SEs from 2008 using the original and updated AUC. We also performed pre-authorization determinations on these SEs using the guidelines of 2 RBMs. We then classified and compared the appropriateness of 209 SEs from 2011 using the updated criteria to that of the 2008 cohort. Finally, we rated and compared 111 SEs requested by cardiologists after an educational project to 111 SEs referred before the intervention.
RESULTS: Overall, nearly one-third of SEs were requested for inappropriate indications. Using 2011 AUC, the original ratings of 52 (25%) studies by AUC 2008 were changed and the number of unclassified SE decreased from 20 (9.6%) to 2 (1%). Correlation between RBM pre-authorization determination and AUC ratings was substantial for the first RBM (κ = 0.625) and fair for the second (κ = 0.358). However, 12.9% and 41.9% of studies classified as appropriate or uncertain by the AUC would not have received pre-authorization according to the guidelines of the first and second RBMs, respectively. Referrals of inappropriate SE did not decrease over time or with an educational intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: The revisions in the updated AUC improve their clinical application by encompassing nearly all indications for SE. The limited correlation between AUC ratings and RBM determinations suggests a need for greater consistency. The large number of SE requested for inappropriate indications at our institution did not decrease with time or education.
Copyright © 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23433927     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2012.11.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging        ISSN: 1876-7591


  11 in total

1.  Ensuring appropriate use of cardiac imaging.

Authors:  Thomas P Power
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  Clinician-dependent variations in inappropriate use of myocardial perfusion imaging: training, specialty, and location.

Authors:  David E Winchester; Joseph Hymas; Ryan Meral; Daniel Nguyen; Raman Dusaj; Leslee J Shaw; Rebecca J Beyth
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2014-03-27       Impact factor: 5.952

3.  Examining the association between utilization management and downstream cardiovascular imaging.

Authors:  Abiy Agiro; Gosia Sylwestrzak; Christiane Shah; Thomas Power; Andrea DeVries
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-04-09       Impact factor: 3.402

4.  Appropriate use criteria implementation with modified Haller index for predicting stress echocardiographic results and outcome in a population of patients with suspected coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Andrea Sonaglioni; Elisabetta Rigamonti; Gian Luigi Nicolosi; Michele Lombardo
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2021-05-07       Impact factor: 2.357

Review 5.  Trends in guideline implementation: a scoping systematic review.

Authors:  Anna R Gagliardi; Samia Alhabib
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2015-04-21       Impact factor: 7.327

6.  Downstream clinical consequences of stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance based on appropriate use criteria.

Authors:  Sloane McGraw; Omer Mirza; Michael A Bauml; Vibhav S Rangarajan; Afshin Farzaneh-Far
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2015-05-15       Impact factor: 5.364

Review 7.  Appropriate Use of Cardiac Stress Testing with Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Joseph A Ladapo; Saul Blecker; Michael O'Donnell; Saahil A Jumkhawala; Pamela S Douglas
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-08-18       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Development and validation of a screening tool for the identification of inappropriate transthoracic echocardiograms.

Authors:  Ricardo Fonseca; Faraz Pathan; Thomas H Marwick
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-10-05       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  How I do it: judging appropriateness for TTE and TEE.

Authors:  Ricardo Fonseca; Thomas H Marwick
Journal:  Cardiovasc Ultrasound       Date:  2014-06-24       Impact factor: 2.062

10.  Physicians' professional identities: a roadmap to understanding "value" in cardiovascular imaging.

Authors:  Eric J Keller; Robert L Vogelzang; Benjamin H Freed; James C Carr; Jeremy D Collins
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2016-08-26       Impact factor: 5.364

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.