The purpose of this study was to investigate the timing, accuracy, clinical impact, and cost of dual orthopedic and radiology interpretation of orthopedic trauma roentgenograms.
The investigation was performed in a combined retrospective-prospective fashion.
Records of 25 retrospective and 25 prospective trauma patients with femoral fractures were reviewed and the radiology and orthopedic roentgenographic interpretations were compared in terms of four criteria : timing, accuracy, clinical impact, and cost.
The orthopedic surgeons documented reading 85% of 272 acute roentgenograms in the retrospective patients and 89% of 181 roentgenograms in the prospective patients.
The orthopedist readings were immediate, 100% accurate, had significant impact on the patients'care, and incurred no additional cost.
The radiologists read 59 and 75% of the retrospective and prospective roentgenograms, respectively.
The accuracy rate was 94 and 96%, the time to reading averaged 7 and 4.6 days, and the estimated cost averaged $393 and $200 per patient, respectively.
The radiologist readings had no impact on patient care.
This study suggests that routine radiology consultation of musculoskeletal films read by the orthopedic surgeon is not required for the care of the acute trauma patient.
Mots-clés Pascal : Radiographie, Etude comparative, Traumatisme, Système ostéoarticulaire pathologie, Homme, Interprétation image, Chirurgien, Radiologue, Analyse coût, Economie santé, Qualité, Evaluation, Radiodiagnostic, Exploration radiologique
Mots-clés Pascal anglais : Radiography, Comparative study, Trauma, Diseases of the osteoarticular system, Human, Image interpretation, Surgeon, Radiologist, Cost analysis, Health economy, Quality, Evaluation, Radiodiagnosis, Radiologic investigation
Notice produite par :
Inist-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique
Cote : 95-0211833
Code Inist : 002B30A01C. Création : 09/06/1995.