ArticleIrish journal of medical science2024
Plain film of the abdomen remains a low sensitivity test in A&E.
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Revolutionizing diagnosis of pulmonaryFrontiers in microbiology · 2024Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPlain film abdomens (PFA) are frequently used in the emergency department to help guide the management of patients presenting with abdominal symptoms. A plain film abdomen contributes minimally to clinical scenarios due to low sensitivity and specificity. Is a PFA useful in the emergency setting or does it serve to further complicate decision making?
aimWe hypothesise that PFAs in the emergency department are over utilised to falsely reassure clinicians and patients alike.
methodsA search of the National Integrated Medical Imaging System (NIMIS) database in an Irish tertiary referral hospital was conducted. All plain film abdominal radiographs requested by the emergency department between 01/01/2022 and 31/08/2022 were identified. Requests where there was suspicion of foreign body were excluded. A retrospective search of the NIMIS database identified subjects who underwent subsequent imaging.
resultsA total of 619 abdominal films were deemed suitable for inclusion. These comprised of 338 male and 282 female subjects. Subjects had an average age of 64 years. Fifty-seven per cent of PFAs detected no abnormality. Forty-two per cent of subjects had subsequent imaging. The plain film findings correlated with further imaging in only 15% of cases. One case of ruptured aortic aneurysm and 11 perforations were detected on computerised tomography, none of these cases were evident on abdominal X-ray.
conclusionPlain film abdomen requests are over utilised in the emergency department. PFAs are not sensitive for detecting acute pathology and should not be used to decide if a patient requires further imaging or a full clinical assessment.
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.