ArticleEmergency radiology2021
Quality use of diagnostic imaging in trauma, and the impact on emergency medical practice-a retrospective clinical audit.
Article in Emergency radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors affecting diagnostic imaging decision-making in the emergency department during day and night shifts.Emergency medicine journal : EMJ · 2025Article
- Measuring appropriateness of diagnostic imaging: a scoping review.Insights into imaging · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe current study aimed to evaluate the appropriateness of the decisions made to order diagnostic imaging for emergency trauma patients.
methodsA retrospective audit of 642 clinical decisions for 370 non-consecutive trauma cases was conducted at a level 1 adult trauma centre. Radiographs and computed tomography investigations were compared for compliance with the American College of Radiology/European Society of Radiology (ACR/ESR) imaging guidelines. The non-compliant imaging orders were evaluated for the following medical officer ranks: Junior Medical Officer (JMO), Senior Resident Medical Officer (SRMO), Emergency Medicine Registrar (EMR) and Consultants/Career Medical Officer (CMO). The time of imaging order (day/evening or night shift), whether the imaging led to conservative or surgical patient management, and whether the imaging order decisions led to a change in the clinical management of the patient were also considered.
resultsNon-compliance with the ACR/ESR guidelines was low. At least half of non-compliant decisions made by each level of medical officer resulted in a change in patient management. In total, 11 (65%), 25 (53%), 12 (63%) and 11 (52%) of non-compliant imaging orders placed by JMOs, SRMOs, EMRs and Consultants, respectively, resulted in change of patient management. JMOs and SRMOs ordered a significantly higher proportion of non-compliant imaging studies for conservatively managed patients in comparison to surgically managed patients.
conclusionThis study highlighted that most non-compliant imaging orders benefited the patient.
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.