Literature DB >> 27609905

Justification and active guideline implementation for spine radiography referrals in primary care.

Pirita Tahvonen1, Heljä Oikarinen1, Jaakko Niinimäki1, Esa Liukkonen1, Seija Mattila1, Osmo Tervonen1.   

Abstract

Background Spinal disorders are a major public health problem. Appropriate diagnostic imaging is an essential part in the management of back complaints. Nevertheless, inappropriate imaging increases population collective dose and health costs without improving outcome. Purpose To determine the effects of active implementation of referral guidelines on the number and justification of spine radiography in primary care in one city. Material and Methods Specified guidelines for spine radiography were distributed to referring practitioners altogether three times during the study period. Educational lectures were provided before the guidelines were taken into use. The guidelines were also made available via the intranet. The number of spine radiography referrals during similar 6-month periods in the year preceding the interventions and the following 2 years was analyzed. Justification of 448 spine radiographs was assessed similarly. Results After interventions, the total number of spine radiography examinations decreased by 48% (P < 0.001) and that of cervical spine radiography by 46% ( P < 0.001), thoracic spine by 53% ( P < 0.001), and lumbar spine by 47% ( P < 0.001). The results persisted after 1-year follow-up. Before interventions, 24% of the cervical, 46% of the thoracic, and 32% of the lumbar spine radiography referrals were justified. After interventions, only justification of lumbar spine radiography improved significantly, 64% being justified ( P = 0.005). Conclusion Spine radiography in primary care can be reduced significantly by active referral guideline implementation. The proportion of inappropriate radiography was unexpectedly high. Thus, further education and studies concerning the appropriate use of spinal radiography seems to be needed.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Spine; education; guidelines; justification; radiation protection; radiography

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27609905     DOI: 10.1177/0284185116661879

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Radiol        ISSN: 0284-1851            Impact factor:   1.990


  10 in total

1.  Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Effectiveness of Implementation Strategies for Non-communicable Disease Guidelines in Primary Health Care.

Authors:  Eva Kovacs; Ralf Strobl; Amanda Phillips; Anna-Janina Stephan; Martin Müller; Jochen Gensichen; Eva Grill
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2018-05-04       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 2.  Defining and measuring imaging appropriateness in low back pain studies: a scoping review.

Authors:  Mark Yates; Crystian B Oliveira; James B Galloway; Chris G Maher
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2020-01-14       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Effectiveness of Breast and Eye Shielding During Cervical Spine Radiography: An Experimental Study.

Authors:  Wiam Elshami; Mohamed M Abuzaid; H O Tekin
Journal:  Risk Manag Healthc Policy       Date:  2020-06-30

Review 4.  Overtesting and undertesting in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jack W O'Sullivan; Ali Albasri; Brian D Nicholson; Rafael Perera; Jeffrey K Aronson; Nia Roberts; Carl Heneghan
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-02-11       Impact factor: 2.692

5.  Development and conduction of an active re-implementation of the Norwegian musculoskeletal guidelines.

Authors:  Ann Mari Gransjøen; Siri Wiig; Kristin Bakke Lysdahl; Bjørn Morten Hofmann
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2018-11-03

6.  What do we really know about the appropriateness of radiation emitting imaging for low back pain in primary and emergency care? A systematic review and meta-analysis of medical record reviews.

Authors:  Gabrielle S Logan; Andrea Pike; Bethan Copsey; Patrick Parfrey; Holly Etchegary; Amanda Hall
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-12-05       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Impact on radiological practice of active guideline implementation of musculoskeletal guideline, as measured over a 12-month period.

Authors:  Ann M Gransjøen; Kjetil Thorsen; Kristin B Lysdahl; Siri Wiig; Bjørn M Hofmann
Journal:  Acta Radiol Open       Date:  2021-03-17

Review 8.  Trends in guideline implementation: an updated scoping review.

Authors:  Sanne Peters; Krithika Sukumar; Sophie Blanchard; Akilesh Ramasamy; Jennifer Malinowski; Pamela Ginex; Emily Senerth; Marleen Corremans; Zachary Munn; Tamara Kredo; Lucia Prieto Remon; Etienne Ngeh; Lisa Kalman; Samia Alhabib; Yasser Sami Amer; Anna Gagliardi
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2022-07-23       Impact factor: 7.960

9.  Appropriate use of medical imaging in two Spanish public hospitals: a cross-sectional analysis.

Authors:  Jorge Vilar-Palop; Ildefonso Hernandez-Aguado; María Pastor-Valero; José Vilar; Isabel González-Alvarez; Blanca Lumbreras
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-03-16       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  Barriers and facilitators for guideline adherence in diagnostic imaging: an explorative study of GPs' and radiologists' perspectives.

Authors:  Ann Mari Gransjøen; Siri Wiig; Kristin Bakke Lysdahl; Bjørn Morten Hofmann
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2018-07-16       Impact factor: 2.655

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.