Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29247530›Full record

ArticleClinical cardiology2017

Appropriateness vs value: Echocardiography in primary care.

Amy Bethge, Oana Penciu, Salma Baksh, Swapnil Parve, Jessika Lobraico, Andrew M Keller

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical cardiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Regional variability of cardiovascular magnetic resonance access and utilization in the United States.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2024
    Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Appropriateness and subsequent management of inpatient echocardiograms: An evaluation of low value care.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2021
    Article
  7. Global evaluation of echocardiography in patients with COVID-19.European heart journal. Cardiovascular Imaging · 2020
    Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

6 authors.

Amy BethgeDepartment of Research and Innovation, Western Connecticut Health Network, Danbury, Connecticut.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1894-1496
Oana PenciuDepartment of Medicine, Western Connecticut Health Network, Danbury, Connecticut.
Salma BakshDepartment of Medicine, Western Connecticut Health Network, Danbury, Connecticut.
Swapnil ParveDepartment of Research and Innovation, Western Connecticut Health Network, Danbury, Connecticut.
Jessika LobraicoDepartment of Research and Innovation, Western Connecticut Health Network, Danbury, Connecticut.
Andrew M KellerDepartment of Medicine, Western Connecticut Health Network, Danbury, Connecticut.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite efforts targeting the growth of healthcare spending within the United States, the current increase in expenditures remains a widespread systemic issue. The overuse of healthcare testing has previously been identified as a modifiable contributing factor. One such test, echocardiography, has seen a continuous increase in its rate of use. This test is frequently ordered by primary-care physicians. HYPOTHESIS: In the setting of a low likelihood of disease, echocardiography does not substantially change cardiac therapy, even if appropriately ordered.

methodsWe randomly identified 500 patients who received an echocardiogram ordered by a primary-care physician between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2014. Of these, 239 patient charts were reviewed and the following extracted: primary indication for the test, echocardiogram results, and changes in patient medical management. In addition, appropriateness of the test was assessed using the appropriate use criteria guidelines for echocardiography.

resultsNearly 97% of the studies within the ambulatory primary-care setting were appropriately ordered according to the appropriate use criteria. Among the 239 patients studied, only 52 had abnormalities and only 6 (2.5%) experienced a change in management that corresponded with the initial suspected diagnosis and echocardiographic findings.

conclusionsTo ensure the greatest value and optimize use of diagnostic testing, it may be necessary to develop a more comprehensive set of guidelines to assist clinicians to readily identify patient populations at low, moderate, and high risk for the presence of disease and provide educational interventions, including feedback regarding individual ordering behaviors.

Indexed as

CardiologyPractice Patterns, Physicians'Ambulatory CareConnecticutEchocardiographyFemaleHealth Care CostsHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrimary Health CareRetrospective StudiesEchocardiographyImagingPhysical Diagnosis/CardiovascularPreventive CardiologyValvular Heart Disease

Identifiers

PMID29247530
PMCPMC6490349

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.