全国 EMG 医生数量横断面调查。

IF 2.3 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Neurology. Clinical practice Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-12 DOI:10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200333
Thy P Nguyen, Deepa Dongarwar, Rajesh K Gupta, Suur Biliciler, Kazim A Sheikh
{"title":"全国 EMG 医生数量横断面调查。","authors":"Thy P Nguyen, Deepa Dongarwar, Rajesh K Gupta, Suur Biliciler, Kazim A Sheikh","doi":"10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200333","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>This study presents results from a survey of physicians performing electrodiagnostic studies to assess average volume. We also assessed how different factors (trainees, technologists, age of the physician, and case complexity) affected volume. Productivity is an important factor for physicians across practice settings. However, unlike evaluation and management services for neurologists, there are no published data for benchmarks of average volume of electrodiagnostic studies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 34-question survey was designed collecting information on demographics, electrodiagnostic study volume, technologists, trainees, referrals, and case complexity. The anonymous survey was disseminated through a QR code or hyperlink to multiple online neurology, physical medicine and rehabilitation, electromyography, and neuromuscular forums. The primary outcome was EMG volume including number of EMGs per half-day and EMG volume per year. We conducted bivariate association analysis between primary outcomes and respondent characteristics using the Pearson χ<sup>2</sup> test. Multivariable regression models determined factors associated with each of our outcome variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 201 respondents initiated the survey. 71% were certified in adult neurology, 19.6% in physical medicine and rehabilitation, and 2.7% in pediatric neurology. 37.5% practiced in academic medicine. The remaining respondents were from private practice, group, solo, hospital employed, or other. 83% of respondents allotted a dedicated half-day to performing EMGs. The median number of EMGs scheduled during a half-day was within 3-4 (45%). 30% and 7% scheduled 5-6 or more than 7 patients per half-day, respectively. The median number of EMGs performed per year was within 251-500 (37%).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This national, cross-sectional survey evaluates average metrics of EMG volume. Our survey showed that the median number of EMGs annually lies between 251 and 500 studies (37%). In addition, for those respondents who allotted a dedicated half-day to performing EMGs, the median number of EMG studies scheduled per half-day lies between 3 and 4 studies (45%). In multivariate analysis, respondent characteristics of age of the physician (older than 45), working with nerve conduction technologists, and holding the position of EMG director were associated with increased EMG volume.</p>","PeriodicalId":19136,"journal":{"name":"Neurology. Clinical practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11194787/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A National Cross-Sectional Survey of EMG Physician Volume.\",\"authors\":\"Thy P Nguyen, Deepa Dongarwar, Rajesh K Gupta, Suur Biliciler, Kazim A Sheikh\",\"doi\":\"10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200333\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>This study presents results from a survey of physicians performing electrodiagnostic studies to assess average volume. We also assessed how different factors (trainees, technologists, age of the physician, and case complexity) affected volume. Productivity is an important factor for physicians across practice settings. However, unlike evaluation and management services for neurologists, there are no published data for benchmarks of average volume of electrodiagnostic studies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 34-question survey was designed collecting information on demographics, electrodiagnostic study volume, technologists, trainees, referrals, and case complexity. The anonymous survey was disseminated through a QR code or hyperlink to multiple online neurology, physical medicine and rehabilitation, electromyography, and neuromuscular forums. The primary outcome was EMG volume including number of EMGs per half-day and EMG volume per year. We conducted bivariate association analysis between primary outcomes and respondent characteristics using the Pearson χ<sup>2</sup> test. Multivariable regression models determined factors associated with each of our outcome variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 201 respondents initiated the survey. 71% were certified in adult neurology, 19.6% in physical medicine and rehabilitation, and 2.7% in pediatric neurology. 37.5% practiced in academic medicine. The remaining respondents were from private practice, group, solo, hospital employed, or other. 83% of respondents allotted a dedicated half-day to performing EMGs. The median number of EMGs scheduled during a half-day was within 3-4 (45%). 30% and 7% scheduled 5-6 or more than 7 patients per half-day, respectively. The median number of EMGs performed per year was within 251-500 (37%).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This national, cross-sectional survey evaluates average metrics of EMG volume. Our survey showed that the median number of EMGs annually lies between 251 and 500 studies (37%). In addition, for those respondents who allotted a dedicated half-day to performing EMGs, the median number of EMG studies scheduled per half-day lies between 3 and 4 studies (45%). In multivariate analysis, respondent characteristics of age of the physician (older than 45), working with nerve conduction technologists, and holding the position of EMG director were associated with increased EMG volume.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19136,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurology. Clinical practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11194787/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurology. Clinical practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200333\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurology. Clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200333","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:本研究介绍了对进行电诊断研究的医生进行调查以评估平均工作量的结果。我们还评估了不同因素(受训人员、技术人员、医生年龄和病例复杂性)对工作量的影响。对于不同执业环境的医生来说,生产率都是一个重要因素。然而,与神经科医生的评估和管理服务不同,目前还没有关于电诊断研究平均工作量基准的公开数据:方法:设计了一项包含 34 个问题的调查,收集有关人口统计学、电诊断研究量、技术人员、受训人员、转诊和病例复杂性的信息。匿名调查通过二维码或超链接传播到多个在线神经病学、物理医学与康复、肌电图和神经肌肉论坛。主要结果是肌电图检查量,包括每半天的肌电图检查次数和每年的肌电图检查量。我们使用 Pearson χ2 检验对主要结果和受访者特征进行了二元关联分析。多变量回归模型确定了与每个结果变量相关的因素:共有 201 名受访者参与了调查。71%的受访者拥有成人神经病学证书,19.6%的受访者拥有物理医学和康复学证书,2.7%的受访者拥有儿科神经病学证书。37.5%的受访者在学术机构行医。其余受访者来自私人诊所、团体、个人、医院或其他机构。83%的受访者专门安排半天时间进行 EMG 检查。半天内安排的 EMG 检查次数中位数在 3-4 次以内(45%)。30%和7%的受访者每半天分别安排了5-6名或7名以上的患者。每年进行的肌电图检查次数中位数在 251-500 次以内(37%):这项全国性横断面调查评估了 EMG 数量的平均指标。我们的调查显示,每年 EMG 检查的中位数在 251 至 500 次之间(37%)。此外,对于那些专门安排半天时间进行 EMG 检查的受访者而言,每半天安排的 EMG 检查次数中位数介于 3 至 4 次之间(45%)。在多变量分析中,受访者的医生年龄(45 岁以上)、与神经传导技术专家合作以及担任 EMG 主任等特征与 EMG 数量的增加有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A National Cross-Sectional Survey of EMG Physician Volume.

Background and objectives: This study presents results from a survey of physicians performing electrodiagnostic studies to assess average volume. We also assessed how different factors (trainees, technologists, age of the physician, and case complexity) affected volume. Productivity is an important factor for physicians across practice settings. However, unlike evaluation and management services for neurologists, there are no published data for benchmarks of average volume of electrodiagnostic studies.

Methods: A 34-question survey was designed collecting information on demographics, electrodiagnostic study volume, technologists, trainees, referrals, and case complexity. The anonymous survey was disseminated through a QR code or hyperlink to multiple online neurology, physical medicine and rehabilitation, electromyography, and neuromuscular forums. The primary outcome was EMG volume including number of EMGs per half-day and EMG volume per year. We conducted bivariate association analysis between primary outcomes and respondent characteristics using the Pearson χ2 test. Multivariable regression models determined factors associated with each of our outcome variables.

Results: A total of 201 respondents initiated the survey. 71% were certified in adult neurology, 19.6% in physical medicine and rehabilitation, and 2.7% in pediatric neurology. 37.5% practiced in academic medicine. The remaining respondents were from private practice, group, solo, hospital employed, or other. 83% of respondents allotted a dedicated half-day to performing EMGs. The median number of EMGs scheduled during a half-day was within 3-4 (45%). 30% and 7% scheduled 5-6 or more than 7 patients per half-day, respectively. The median number of EMGs performed per year was within 251-500 (37%).

Discussion: This national, cross-sectional survey evaluates average metrics of EMG volume. Our survey showed that the median number of EMGs annually lies between 251 and 500 studies (37%). In addition, for those respondents who allotted a dedicated half-day to performing EMGs, the median number of EMG studies scheduled per half-day lies between 3 and 4 studies (45%). In multivariate analysis, respondent characteristics of age of the physician (older than 45), working with nerve conduction technologists, and holding the position of EMG director were associated with increased EMG volume.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Neurology. Clinical practice
Neurology. Clinical practice CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
77
期刊介绍: Neurology® Genetics is an online open access journal publishing peer-reviewed reports in the field of neurogenetics. The journal publishes original articles in all areas of neurogenetics including rare and common genetic variations, genotype-phenotype correlations, outlier phenotypes as a result of mutations in known disease genes, and genetic variations with a putative link to diseases. Articles include studies reporting on genetic disease risk, pharmacogenomics, and results of gene-based clinical trials (viral, ASO, etc.). Genetically engineered model systems are not a primary focus of Neurology® Genetics, but studies using model systems for treatment trials, including well-powered studies reporting negative results, are welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信