ArticleJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology2014
Clinician-dependent variations in inappropriate use of myocardial perfusion imaging: training, specialty, and location.
Article in Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Appropriate Use of Cardiac Stress Testing with Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.PloS one · 2016Pooled it
- Association of State Share of Nonphysician Practitioners With Diagnostic Imaging Ordering Among Emergency Department Visits for Medicare Beneficiaries.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Estimates of radiation exposure and subsequent risk of malignancy due to cardiac imaging in the emergency department for evaluation of chest pain: a cohort study.Coronary artery disease · 2019Article
- Perceptions of patients and providers on myocardial perfusion imaging for asymptomatic patients, choosing wisely, and professional liability.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- Outcomes after inappropriate nuclear myocardial perfusion imaging: A meta-analysis.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2016Review
- Review of cardiovascular imaging in The Journal of Nuclear Cardiology in 2014: Part 2 of 2: Myocardial perfusion imaging.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2015Review
- Metrics of quality care in veterans: correlation between primary-care performance measures and inappropriate myocardial perfusion imaging.Clinical cardiology · 2015Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInappropriate use of myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) may vary depending on the training, specialty, or practice location of the clinician.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional investigation of consecutive patients who underwent MPI at our Veterans Affairs medical center between December 2010 and July 2011. Characteristics of the MPI ordering clinicians were extracted to investigate any associations with inappropriate use.
results582 patients were included, 9.8% were inappropriate. No difference in inappropriate use was observed between cardiology and non-cardiology clinicians (n = 21, 9.5% vs n = 36, 10.0%, P = .83); no difference was noted between nurse practitioners/physician assistants, attending physicians, and housestaff (7.5% vs 11.2% vs 1.8%, P = .06). Comparing inpatient, emergency department and outpatient clinician groups, the difference was null (8.6% vs 6.3% vs 10.1%, P = .75). For most clinician groups, the most common inappropriate indication was an asymptomatic scenario; however, some groups were different: definite acute coronary syndrome for inpatient clinicians and low risk syncope for emergency medicine clinicians.
conclusionsClinician groups appear to order inappropriate MPI at similar rates, regardless of their training, specialty, or practice location. Differences in the most common type of inappropriate testing suggest that interventions to reduce inappropriate use should be tailored to specific clinician types.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24671699What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.