Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28797716›Full record

ReviewCurrent problems in diagnostic radiology

Radiology Trainee vs Faculty Radiologist Fluoroscopy Time for Imaging-Guided Procedures: A Retrospective Study of 17,966 Reports Over a 5.5-Year Period.

Ariadne K DeSimone, Andrew Post, Richard Duszak, Phuong-Anh T Duong

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current problems in diagnostic radiology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ariadne K DeSimoneDepartment of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA.
Andrew PostDepartment of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA; Department of Biomedical Informatics, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA.
Richard DuszakDepartment of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA.
Phuong-Anh T DuongDepartment of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA. Electronic address: pduong3@emory.edu.
Emory University · US

Funding

Implementing a Maternal health and PRegnancy Outcomes Vision for Everyone (IMPROVE)UL1TR002378 · NCATS · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI Andres J Garcia, Elizabeth O. Ofili · 2017 to 2026
$92.1M
Atlanta Clinical and Translational Science Institute (ACTSI) RenewalUL1TR000454 · NCATS · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI STEPHENS, DAVID S · 2012 to 2016
$25.8M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000454NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002378
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To evaluate differences in fluoroscopy time (FT) for common vascular access and gastrointestinal procedures performed by radiology trainees vs faculty radiologists. Report information was extracted for all 17,966 index fluoroscopy services performed by trainees or faculty, or both from 2 university hospitals over 66 months. Various vascular access procedures (eg, peripherally inserted central catheters [PICCs] and ports) and gastrointestinal fluoroscopy procedures (eg, upper gastrointestinal and contrast enema studies) were specifically targeted. Statistical analysis was performed. FT was recorded in 17,549 of 17,966 reports (98%) The 1393 procedures performed by nonphysician providers or transitional year interns were excluded. Residents, fellows, and faculty were primary operators in 5066, 6489, and 4601 procedures, respectively. Average FT (in seconds) for resident and fellow services, respectively, was less than that of faculty only for PICCs (75 and 101 vs 148, P < 0.01). For all other procedures, average FT of trainee services was greater than that for faculty. This was statistically significant (P < 0.05) for fellows vs faculty port placement (121 vs 87), resident vs faculty small bowel series (130 vs 96), and both resident and fellow vs faculty esophagram procedures (143 and 183 vs 126 ). FT for residents was significantly less than that for fellows only for PICCs (75 vs 101, P < 0.01). For most, but not all, fluoroscopy procedures commonly performed by radiology trainees, FT is greater than that for procedures performed by faculty radiologists. Better awareness and understanding of such differences may aid training programs in developing benchmarks, protocols, and focused teaching in the safe use of fluoroscopy for patients and operators.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceCross-Sectional StudiesEducation, Medical, GraduateFluoroscopyHospitals, UniversityHumansInternship and ResidencyRadiologistsRadiology, InterventionalRetrospective StudiesTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID28797716
PMCPMC5758443
OpenAlexW2725023344

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.