ArticleCardiology in the young2018
Appropriate Use Criteria for paediatric echocardiography in an outpatient practice: a validation study.
Article in Cardiology in the young, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Telehealth and Application of Appropriate Use Criteria for Pediatric Transthoracic Echocardiography.Pediatric cardiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough transthoracic echocardiography is the dominant imaging modality in CHD, optimal utilisation is unclear. We assessed whether adherence to the paediatric Appropriate Use Criteria for outpatient transthoracic echocardiography could reduce inappropriate use without missing significant cardiac disease.
methodsUsing the Appropriate Use Criteria, we determined the indication and appropriateness rating for each initial echocardiogram performed at our institution during calendar year 2014 (N=1383). Chart review documented ordering provider training, patient demographics, and study result, classified as normal, abnormal, or abnormal motivating treatment within a 2-year follow-up period. We tested whether provider training level or patient age correlated with echocardiographic findings or appropriateness rating.
resultsWe found that 83.9% of echocardiograms were normal and that 66.7% had an appropriate indication. Nearly all abnormal results and all results motivating treatment were in appropriate studies, giving an odds ratio of 2.73 for an abnormal result if an appropriate indication was present (95% confidence interval 1.92-3.89, p<0.001). None of the remaining initial abnormal results with less than appropriate indications became significant, resulting in treatment over 2 years. Results suggest a potential reduction in imaging volume of as much as 33% with application of the criteria. Cardiologists ordered nearly all studies resulting in treatment but also more echocardiograms with less appropriate indications. Most examinations were in older patients; however, most abnormal results were in patients younger than 1 year.
conclusionsThe Appropriate Use Criteria can be used to safely reduce echocardiography volume while still detecting significant heart disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.