Suppr超能文献

在一家三级转诊中心对电诊断检查申请的充分性进行评估。

Evaluation of the adequacy of requests for electrodiagnostic examination in a tertiary referral center.

作者信息

Nikolic Ana, Stevic Zorica, Peric Stojan, Stojanovic Vidosava Rakocevic, Lavrnic Dragana

机构信息

Neurology Clinic, Clinical Center of Serbia, dr Subotica 6, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia, Serbia; Medical faculty, Belgrade University, dr Subotica 8, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia, Serbia.

Neurology Clinic, Clinical Center of Serbia, dr Subotica 6, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia, Serbia; Medical faculty, Belgrade University, dr Subotica 8, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia, Serbia.

出版信息

Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2016 Sep;148:130-6. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2016.07.021. Epub 2016 Jul 12.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Diagnostic procedures are often overused in the attempt to substitute for the good clinical examination. The aim of this study was to evaluate the type and the accuracy of the referral diagnosis to our EMG lab, as well as the impact of electrodiagnostic (EDX) examination on the diagnosis of our patients.

METHODS

In this prospective study all patients examined in the six months period in a single tertiary referral EMG lab were analyzed. All patients were tested in a uniform fashion and by the same neurologist, according to the referral diagnosis.

RESULTS

EDX examination was performed in 570 patients. Most of the patients (43.9%) were referred with the diagnosis of polyneuropathy, lumbosacral (23.7%) or cervical (11.2%) radiculopathy and myasthenia gravis (11.6%). The outcome after EDX examination was: diagnosis confirmation in 49.6% of patients, new clinically relevant diagnosis in 16%, incidental diagnosis in 4% and normal EDX examination in 36.1% of patients. EDX examination confirmed referral diagnosis more often in patients referred by neuromuscular neurologists, while normal EDX finding was reported more often in patients referred by other neurologists.

CONCLUSION

This study has confirmed the inappropriateness of a large number of referrals to EDX testing, especially made by the non-neuromuscular neurologists.

摘要

目的

诊断程序常常被过度使用,试图以此替代良好的临床检查。本研究的目的是评估转诊至我们肌电图实验室的诊断类型及准确性,以及电诊断(EDX)检查对我们患者诊断的影响。

方法

在这项前瞻性研究中,对在一个单一的三级转诊肌电图实验室六个月期间检查的所有患者进行了分析。根据转诊诊断,所有患者均由同一位神经科医生以统一方式进行检查。

结果

对570例患者进行了EDX检查。大多数患者(43.9%)转诊诊断为多发性神经病、腰骶部(23.7%)或颈部(11.2%)神经根病以及重症肌无力(11.6%)。EDX检查后的结果为:49.6%的患者诊断得到确认,16%有新的临床相关诊断,4%为偶然诊断,36.1%的患者EDX检查正常。神经肌肉科神经科医生转诊的患者中,EDX检查更常确认转诊诊断,而其他神经科医生转诊的患者中,EDX检查正常的情况报告得更多。

结论

本研究证实了大量转诊进行EDX检查的不恰当性,尤其是非神经肌肉科神经科医生的转诊。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验