STUDY DESIGN: Prospective comparative study. PURPOSE: To compare the incidence and severity of adverse reactions associated with myelography performed in outpatients vs. in inpatients and report the safety and usefulness of outpatient myelography in Japanese patients. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Myelography is normally performed as an inpatient procedure in most hospitals in Japan. No studies have reported the usefulness and adverse effects of outpatient myelography in Japanese patients. METHODS: We performed 221 myelography procedures. Eighty-five of the 221 patients underwent outpatient myelography using our new protocol. The incidence and severity of adverse reactions were compared with the other 136 patients, who underwent conventional inpatient myelography. We further compared the cost of outpatient and inpatient myelography. RESULTS: The overall rate of adverse effects was 9.4% in outpatients, as compared with 7.4% in inpatients. Overall, 1.2% of outpatients and 0.74% inpatients experienced "severe" adverse effects (requiring hospitalization). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in either the overall rate of adverse effects or the rate of "severe" adverse effects. Moreover, the average outpatient procedure cost was only one-third to one-half that of the inpatient procedure. CONCLUSIONS: This was the first study to address the safety and usefulness of outpatient myelography in Japanese patients. If selected according to proper inclusion criteria for outpatient procedure, no significant differences were observed in the adverse effects between inpatients and outpatients. The outpatient procedure is more economical and has the added benefit of being more convenient and time-efficient for the patient.
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective comparative study. PURPOSE: To compare the incidence and severity of adverse reactions associated with myelography performed in outpatients vs. in inpatients and report the safety and usefulness of outpatient myelography in Japanese patients. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Myelography is normally performed as an inpatient procedure in most hospitals in Japan. No studies have reported the usefulness and adverse effects of outpatient myelography in Japanese patients. METHODS: We performed 221 myelography procedures. Eighty-five of the 221 patients underwent outpatient myelography using our new protocol. The incidence and severity of adverse reactions were compared with the other 136 patients, who underwent conventional inpatient myelography. We further compared the cost of outpatient and inpatient myelography. RESULTS: The overall rate of adverse effects was 9.4% in outpatients, as compared with 7.4% in inpatients. Overall, 1.2% of outpatients and 0.74% inpatients experienced "severe" adverse effects (requiring hospitalization). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in either the overall rate of adverse effects or the rate of "severe" adverse effects. Moreover, the average outpatient procedure cost was only one-third to one-half that of the inpatient procedure. CONCLUSIONS: This was the first study to address the safety and usefulness of outpatient myelography in Japanese patients. If selected according to proper inclusion criteria for outpatient procedure, no significant differences were observed in the adverse effects between inpatients and outpatients. The outpatient procedure is more economical and has the added benefit of being more convenient and time-efficient for the patient.
Entities:
Keywords:
Complications; Health care costs; Inpatient; Myelography; Outpatient
Authors: Jung-Ha Kim; Rogier M van Rijn; Maurits W van Tulder; Bart W Koes; Michiel R de Boer; Abida Z Ginai; Raymond W G J Ostelo; Danielle A M W van der Windt; Arianne P Verhagen Journal: Chiropr Man Therap Date: 2018-08-21