Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26082653›Full record

ArticleClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR2015

Prevalence and cost of imaging in inpatient falls: the rising cost of falling.

Jessica Fields, Tahani Alturkistani, Neal Kumar, Arjun Kanuri, Deeb N Salem, Samson Munn, Deborah Blazey-Martin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Cost of Low-Value Imaging Worldwide: A Systematic Review.Applied health economics and health policy · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Jessica FieldsDepartment of Medicine, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Tahani AlturkistaniDepartment of Radiology, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Neal KumarTufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
Arjun KanuriTufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
Deeb N SalemDepartment of Medicine, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Samson MunnDepartment of Radiology, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Deborah Blazey-MartinDepartment of Medicine, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo quantify the type, prevalence, and cost of imaging following inpatient falls, identify factors associated with post-fall imaging, and determine correlates of positive versus negative imaging.

designSingle-center retrospective cohort study of inpatient falls. Data were collected from the hospital's adverse event reporting system, DrQuality. Age, sex, date, time, and location of fall, clinical service, Morse Fall Scale/fall protocol, admitting diagnosis, and fall-related imaging studies were reviewed. Cost included professional and facilities fees for each study.

settingFour hundred and fifteen bed urban academic hospital over 3 years (2008-2010). PATIENTS: All adult inpatient falls during the study period were included. Falls experienced by patients aged <18 years, outpatient and emergency patients, visitors to the hospital, and staff were excluded. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN

resultsFive hundred and thirty inpatient falls occurred during the study period, average patient age 60.7 years (range 20-98). More than half of falls were men (55%) and patients considered at risk of falls (56%). Falls were evenly distributed across morning (33%), evening (34%), and night (33%) shifts. Of 530 falls, 178 (34%) patients were imaged with 262 studies. Twenty percent of patients imaged had at least one positive imaging study attributed to the fall and 82% of studies were negative. Total cost of imaging was $160,897, 63% ($100,700) from head computed tomography (CT).

conclusionInpatient falls affect patients of both sexes, all ages, occur at any time of day and lead to expensive imaging, mainly from head CTs. Further study should be targeted toward clarifying the indications for head CT after inpatient falls and validating risk models for positive and negative imaging, in order to decrease unnecessary imaging and thereby limit unnecessary cost and radiation exposure.

Indexed as

diagnostic imagingfallshealth care costsincident reportinginpatients

Identifiers

PMID26082653
PMCPMC4461128

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.