Old habits die hard: chest radiography for screening purposes in primary care

Απλή σελίδα τεκμηρίου
dc.contributor.authorMauri, D.en
dc.contributor.authorKamposioras, K.en
dc.contributor.authorProiskos, A.en
dc.contributor.authorXilomenos, A.en
dc.contributor.authorPeponi, C.en
dc.contributor.authorDambrosio, M.en
dc.contributor.authorZacharias, G.en
dc.contributor.authorKoukourakis, G.en
dc.contributor.authorPentheroudakis, G.en
dc.contributor.authorPavlidis, N.en
dc.date.accessioned2015-11-24T19:01:10Z
dc.date.available2015-11-24T19:01:10Z
dc.identifier.issn1088-0224-
dc.identifier.urihttps://olympias.lib.uoi.gr/jspui/handle/123456789/19651
dc.rightsDefault Licence-
dc.subjectHumansen
dc.subjectMass Screening/*utilizationen
dc.subjectPhysician's Practice Patterns/*trendsen
dc.subjectPredictive Value of Testsen
dc.subjectPrimary Health Care/*trendsen
dc.subjectRadiography, Thoracic/*utilizationen
dc.subjectRisk Assessmenten
dc.titleOld habits die hard: chest radiography for screening purposes in primary careen
heal.abstractOBJECTIVE: To assess whether the use of chest radiography for screening changes over time. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, ISI, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and handsearching of selected journals. REVIEW METHODS: We evaluated whether the proportion of primary care physicians using chest radiography to screen for (1) malignancy in the general asymptomatic population, (2) malignancy in a high-risk subgroup, (3) any disease in the general population, and (4) any disease in a high-risk subgroup changed over time, using random-effects meta-regression analysis. Adjustments for the availability of national guidelines were also performed. RESULTS: Overall, 10% to 90% of primary care physicians reported using chest x-ray for screening. In unadjusted analyses, the proportion of physicians using chest radiography for cancer screening in the general population tended to increase by 0.9% per year (8 studies, n = 4313). The corresponding annual changes were -2.9% for cancer screening in high-risk subgroups (8 studies, n = 2784) and -0.4% regarding screening for any disease in the population (7 studies, n = 2627). No meta-regressions were run for outcome (4) (only 1 study). In the adjusted analyses, there was a decreasing nonsignificant trend for all outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Despite formal recommendations, many physicians still use chest x-ray for screening, with their number decreasing slowly over time. This practice may be harmful because the positive predictive value of chest radiography is low, and further evaluation of false-positive findings might be associated with increased cost and risk from additional diagnostic or therapeutic interventions.en
heal.accesscampus-
heal.fullTextAvailabilityTRUE-
heal.identifier.secondaryhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17090221-
heal.journalNameAm J Manag Careen
heal.journalTypepeer-reviewed-
heal.languageen-
heal.publicationDate2006-
heal.recordProviderΠανεπιστήμιο Ιωαννίνων. Σχολή Επιστημών Υγείας. Τμήμα Ιατρικήςel
heal.typejournalArticle-
heal.type.elΆρθρο Περιοδικούel
heal.type.enJournal articleen

Αρχεία

Φάκελος/Πακέτο αδειών

Προβολή: 1 - 1 of 1
Μικρογραφία εικόνας
Ονομα:
license.txt
Μέγεθος:
1.74 KB
Μορφότυπο:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Περιγραφή:
Κατεβάστε

Συλλογές

Άρθρα σε επιστημονικά περιοδικά ( Ανοικτά) - ΙΑΤ