Vanneste J, van Acker R
Department of Neurology, St Lucasziekenhuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1990 Jul;53(7):564-8. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.53.7.564.
Forty six Dutch neurologists and neurosurgeons were interviewed to evaluate the clinical value of research articles on normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH). From this survey it appears that most clinicians still limit investigations to psychometry, CSF-tap test(s), and cisternography. The main reasons for not using other techniques were: their invasiveness, technical complexity, poor availability, lack of time and doubt on their additional predictive value. There is an obvious discrepancy between the quantity of publications on NPH and their impact and their ability to assist clinicians in selecting potential NPH patients for a shunt.
为评估有关正常压力脑积水(NPH)研究文章的临床价值,我们采访了46位荷兰神经科医生和神经外科医生。从这项调查来看,大多数临床医生仍将检查局限于心理测量、脑脊液穿刺试验和脑池造影。不使用其他技术的主要原因是:它们具有侵入性、技术复杂、难以获得、缺乏时间以及对其额外预测价值存在疑虑。关于NPH的出版物数量与其影响力以及协助临床医生选择潜在分流手术NPH患者的能力之间存在明显差异。