Advanced

A retrospective analysis of the clinical impact of 939 chest radiographs using the medical records.

Geijer, Mats LU ; Ivarsson, Liz and Göthlin, Jan H (2012) In Radiology research and practice 2012.
Abstract
Objective. Between one-third and half of all radiology examinations worldwide are probably chest studies. The aim of the current study was to retrospectively evaluate the clinical influence of chest radiography. Methods. In a tertiary referral hospital, 939 consecutive daytime chest radiography examinations were evaluated. The outcome was classified as normal, incidental, or pathologic. The referring physician's reaction to radiologic outcome was classified as highly expected, moderately expected, or unexpected. The influence on the patients' treatment was divided into four groups from major to no influence. Results. In all, 71.6% of the studies had a highly expected outcome. Moderately expected or unexpected outcomes were noted in 36.6%... (More)
Objective. Between one-third and half of all radiology examinations worldwide are probably chest studies. The aim of the current study was to retrospectively evaluate the clinical influence of chest radiography. Methods. In a tertiary referral hospital, 939 consecutive daytime chest radiography examinations were evaluated. The outcome was classified as normal, incidental, or pathologic. The referring physician's reaction to radiologic outcome was classified as highly expected, moderately expected, or unexpected. The influence on the patients' treatment was divided into four groups from major to no influence. Results. In all, 71.6% of the studies had a highly expected outcome. Moderately expected or unexpected outcomes were noted in 36.6% of 500 pathologic examinations. Unexpected outcome was noted in 11.6% of all studies. The radiologic outcome influenced treatment in 65.4% of patients where pathology was demonstrated. Patients with normal or incidental findings had treatment influenced in 1/3 of the cases. Unexpected findings influenced treatment more than moderately expected findings. When radiological findings were highly expected, treatment was influenced in less than half of the cases. Surprisingly few chest radiology examinations were commented upon in the medical records. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
Radiology research and practice
volume
2012
publisher
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
external identifiers
  • pmid:23316358
ISSN
2090-195X
DOI
10.1155/2012/862198
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
d21357f1-6a61-4e63-9494-8912473dd373 (old id 3438749)
alternative location
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23316358?dopt=Abstract
date added to LUP
2013-02-04 13:08:09
date last changed
2016-09-20 04:27:45
@article{d21357f1-6a61-4e63-9494-8912473dd373,
  abstract     = {Objective. Between one-third and half of all radiology examinations worldwide are probably chest studies. The aim of the current study was to retrospectively evaluate the clinical influence of chest radiography. Methods. In a tertiary referral hospital, 939 consecutive daytime chest radiography examinations were evaluated. The outcome was classified as normal, incidental, or pathologic. The referring physician's reaction to radiologic outcome was classified as highly expected, moderately expected, or unexpected. The influence on the patients' treatment was divided into four groups from major to no influence. Results. In all, 71.6% of the studies had a highly expected outcome. Moderately expected or unexpected outcomes were noted in 36.6% of 500 pathologic examinations. Unexpected outcome was noted in 11.6% of all studies. The radiologic outcome influenced treatment in 65.4% of patients where pathology was demonstrated. Patients with normal or incidental findings had treatment influenced in 1/3 of the cases. Unexpected findings influenced treatment more than moderately expected findings. When radiological findings were highly expected, treatment was influenced in less than half of the cases. Surprisingly few chest radiology examinations were commented upon in the medical records.},
  articleno    = {862198},
  author       = {Geijer, Mats and Ivarsson, Liz and Göthlin, Jan H},
  issn         = {2090-195X},
  language     = {eng},
  publisher    = {Hindawi Publishing Corporation},
  series       = {Radiology research and practice},
  title        = {A retrospective analysis of the clinical impact of 939 chest radiographs using the medical records.},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/862198},
  volume       = {2012},
  year         = {2012},
}