Department of Radiology, Michigan Medicine, 1500 E Medical Center Dr B2-A209A, Ann Arbor, MI 48109.
Michigan Radiology Quality Collaborative, Ann Arbor, MI.
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020 May;214(5):1122-1130. doi: 10.2214/AJR.19.22189. Epub 2020 Feb 11.
The purpose of this study was to determine whether diagnostic radiologists impart variation into resource use and patient outcomes in emergency department (ED) patients undergoing CT for headache. This was a single-institution retrospective quality assurance cohort study of 25,596 unique adult ED patients undergoing head CT for headache from January 2012 to October 2017. CT examinations were interpreted by 55 attending radiologists (25 neuroradiologists, 30 radiologists of other specialties) who each interpreted a mean of 1469.8 ± 787.9 CT examinations. Risk adjustment for variables thought to influence outcome included baseline risk (demographics, Elixhauser comorbidity score), clinical factors (vital signs, ED triage and pain scores, laboratory data, hydrocephalus, prior intracranial hemorrhage, neurosurgical consultation within last 12 months), and system factors (time of CT, physician experience, neuroradiology training). Multivariable models were built to analyze the effect of individual radiologists on subsequent outcomes. Any value less than 0.007 was considered significant after Bonferroni correction. The study found 57.5% (14,718/25,596) of CT interpretations were performed by neuroradiologists, and most patients (98.1% [25,119/25,596]) had no neurosurgical history. After risk adjustment, individual radiologists were not an independent predictor of hospital admission ( = 0.49), 30-day readmission ( = 0.30), 30-day mortality ( = 0.14), or neurosurgical intervention ( = 0.04) but did predict MRI use ( < 0.001; odds ratio [OR] range among radiologists, 0.009-38.2), neurology consultation ( < 0.001; OR range, 0.4-3.2), and neurosurgical consultation ( < 0.001; OR range, 0.1-9.9). Radiologists with different skills, experience, and practice patterns appear interchangeable for major clinical outcomes when interpreting CT for headache in the ED, but their differences predict differential use of downstream health care resources. Resource use measures are potential quality indicators in this cohort.
本研究旨在确定诊断放射科医生是否会在急诊科(ED)因头痛行 CT 检查的患者中对资源利用和患者结局产生影响。这是一项回顾性质量保证队列研究,对 2012 年 1 月至 2017 年 10 月期间因头痛在 ED 行头部 CT 检查的 25596 例成年 ED 患者进行了研究。25 名神经放射科医生和 30 名其他专业放射科医生分别对 1469.8±787.9 次 CT 检查进行了解读。对可能影响结局的变量进行了基线风险(人口统计学、Elixhauser 合并症评分)、临床因素(生命体征、ED 分诊和疼痛评分、实验室数据、脑积水、既往颅内出血、过去 12 个月内神经外科会诊)和系统因素(CT 时间、医生经验、神经放射学培训)的风险调整。建立多变量模型来分析个别放射科医生对后续结局的影响。经过 Bonferroni 校正后,任何<0.007 的 值都被认为具有统计学意义。研究发现,57.5%(14718/25596)的 CT 解读由神经放射科医生完成,大多数患者(98.1%[25119/25596])没有神经外科病史。经过风险调整后,个别放射科医生不是住院( = 0.49)、30 天再入院( = 0.30)、30 天死亡率( = 0.14)或神经外科干预( = 0.04)的独立预测因素,但确实预测了 MRI 使用率(<0.001;放射科医生之间的比值比范围,0.009-38.2)、神经科会诊(<0.001;比值比范围,0.4-3.2)和神经外科会诊(<0.001;比值比范围,0.1-9.9)。在 ED 对头痛行 CT 检查时,具有不同技能、经验和实践模式的放射科医生似乎可以互换用于主要临床结局,但他们的差异预测了下游卫生保健资源的使用差异。资源利用指标是该队列中的潜在质量指标。