全科医生的即时超声检查是否会导致不适当的护理?一项后续研究。

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Camilla Aakjær Andersen, John Brandt Brodersen, Jan Mainz, Janus Laust Thomsen, Ole Graumann, Thomas Løkkegaard, Martin Bach Jensen
{"title":"全科医生的即时超声检查是否会导致不适当的护理?一项后续研究。","authors":"Camilla Aakjær Andersen, John Brandt Brodersen, Jan Mainz, Janus Laust Thomsen, Ole Graumann, Thomas Løkkegaard, Martin Bach Jensen","doi":"10.1080/02813432.2025.2487095","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The use of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in general practice increases, but little is known about potential unintended findings and harms to patients. Information regarding such unwanted effects may be obtained by evaluating the medical records of patients who have been scanned by their general practitioner.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify and characterize re-consultations related to POCUS use in general practice, potential misdiagnosis, overdiagnosis, and incidental findings, and to compare potentially troublesome cases to GPs' scanning competence and type of ultrasound device.</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>Professors in general practice with extensive experience in both research and quality assurance in general practice did a blinded review of prospectively collected routine electronic medical record data combined with cross-sectional data collected in relation to POCUS examinations.</p><p><strong>Subjects: </strong>Twenty general practitioners collected data on 564 patients examined with POCUS in primary care.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>International standards for the classification of adverse events and incidental findings were used. First, research assistants identified all re-consultations described in the medical records that were related to the primary health complaint at the index consultation. Second, these re-consultations were classified by the medical experts in terms of seriousness and relation to the POCUS examination performed at the index consultation. In addition, the experts identified possible misdiagnosis, possible overdiagnosis, and incidental findings. Finally, identified cases were discussed in terms of appropriateness and described narratively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Medical records of 564 patients were reviewed. A low risk of possible misdiagnosis (5.3%), potential overdiagnosis (0.7%), and incidental findings (0.7%) were found. Eleven POCUS-related re-consultations were identified and described.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>POCUS scanning performed by general practitioners was generally safe, but it can result in unnecessary examinations and potential harm in a few cases. Certain areas, e.g. pelvic scans that included the ovaries, may especially be prone to misdiagnosis.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT03375333.</p>","PeriodicalId":21521,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care","volume":" ","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does point-of-care ultrasound examination by the general practitioner lead to inappropriate care? A follow-up study.\",\"authors\":\"Camilla Aakjær Andersen, John Brandt Brodersen, Jan Mainz, Janus Laust Thomsen, Ole Graumann, Thomas Løkkegaard, Martin Bach Jensen\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02813432.2025.2487095\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The use of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in general practice increases, but little is known about potential unintended findings and harms to patients. Information regarding such unwanted effects may be obtained by evaluating the medical records of patients who have been scanned by their general practitioner.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify and characterize re-consultations related to POCUS use in general practice, potential misdiagnosis, overdiagnosis, and incidental findings, and to compare potentially troublesome cases to GPs' scanning competence and type of ultrasound device.</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>Professors in general practice with extensive experience in both research and quality assurance in general practice did a blinded review of prospectively collected routine electronic medical record data combined with cross-sectional data collected in relation to POCUS examinations.</p><p><strong>Subjects: </strong>Twenty general practitioners collected data on 564 patients examined with POCUS in primary care.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>International standards for the classification of adverse events and incidental findings were used. First, research assistants identified all re-consultations described in the medical records that were related to the primary health complaint at the index consultation. Second, these re-consultations were classified by the medical experts in terms of seriousness and relation to the POCUS examination performed at the index consultation. In addition, the experts identified possible misdiagnosis, possible overdiagnosis, and incidental findings. Finally, identified cases were discussed in terms of appropriateness and described narratively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Medical records of 564 patients were reviewed. A low risk of possible misdiagnosis (5.3%), potential overdiagnosis (0.7%), and incidental findings (0.7%) were found. Eleven POCUS-related re-consultations were identified and described.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>POCUS scanning performed by general practitioners was generally safe, but it can result in unnecessary examinations and potential harm in a few cases. Certain areas, e.g. pelvic scans that included the ovaries, may especially be prone to misdiagnosis.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT03375333.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21521,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02813432.2025.2487095\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02813432.2025.2487095","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在一般实践中,即时超声(POCUS)的使用越来越多,但对潜在的意外发现和对患者的危害知之甚少。通过评估全科医生扫描过的病人的医疗记录,可以获得有关此类不良影响的信息。目的:识别和描述与POCUS在一般实践中使用相关的复诊,潜在的误诊,过度诊断和意外发现,并将潜在的麻烦病例与全科医生的扫描能力和超声设备类型进行比较。设计和背景:在全科医学研究和质量保证方面具有丰富经验的全科医学教授对前瞻性收集的常规电子病历数据和收集的与POCUS检查相关的横断面数据进行了盲法审查。对象:20名全科医生收集了564名在初级保健中接受POCUS检查的患者的数据。主要结局指标:不良事件和意外发现分类采用国际标准。首先,研究助理确定了医疗记录中描述的所有与索引咨询中的初级健康投诉相关的再次咨询。其次,这些复诊由医学专家根据严重程度和与索引会诊时进行的POCUS检查的关系进行分类。此外,专家们还确定了可能的误诊、可能的过度诊断和偶然发现。最后,对已确定的案例进行了适当性讨论,并进行了叙述。结果:回顾了564例患者的病历。误诊(5.3%)、过度诊断(0.7%)和意外发现(0.7%)的风险较低。确定并说明了11次与人权事务中心有关的重新协商。结论:全科医生进行POCUS扫描总体上是安全的,但在少数病例中可能导致不必要的检查和潜在的危害。某些区域,如盆腔扫描包括卵巢,可能特别容易误诊。试验注册号:NCT03375333。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Does point-of-care ultrasound examination by the general practitioner lead to inappropriate care? A follow-up study.

Background: The use of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in general practice increases, but little is known about potential unintended findings and harms to patients. Information regarding such unwanted effects may be obtained by evaluating the medical records of patients who have been scanned by their general practitioner.

Objective: To identify and characterize re-consultations related to POCUS use in general practice, potential misdiagnosis, overdiagnosis, and incidental findings, and to compare potentially troublesome cases to GPs' scanning competence and type of ultrasound device.

Design and setting: Professors in general practice with extensive experience in both research and quality assurance in general practice did a blinded review of prospectively collected routine electronic medical record data combined with cross-sectional data collected in relation to POCUS examinations.

Subjects: Twenty general practitioners collected data on 564 patients examined with POCUS in primary care.

Main outcome measures: International standards for the classification of adverse events and incidental findings were used. First, research assistants identified all re-consultations described in the medical records that were related to the primary health complaint at the index consultation. Second, these re-consultations were classified by the medical experts in terms of seriousness and relation to the POCUS examination performed at the index consultation. In addition, the experts identified possible misdiagnosis, possible overdiagnosis, and incidental findings. Finally, identified cases were discussed in terms of appropriateness and described narratively.

Results: Medical records of 564 patients were reviewed. A low risk of possible misdiagnosis (5.3%), potential overdiagnosis (0.7%), and incidental findings (0.7%) were found. Eleven POCUS-related re-consultations were identified and described.

Conclusion: POCUS scanning performed by general practitioners was generally safe, but it can result in unnecessary examinations and potential harm in a few cases. Certain areas, e.g. pelvic scans that included the ovaries, may especially be prone to misdiagnosis.

Trial registration number: NCT03375333.

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
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
19.00%
发文量
47
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care is an international online open access journal publishing articles with relevance to general practice and primary health care. Focusing on the continuous professional development in family medicine the journal addresses clinical, epidemiological and humanistic topics in relation to the daily clinical practice. Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care is owned by the members of the National Colleges of General Practice in the five Nordic countries through the Nordic Federation of General Practice (NFGP). The journal includes original research on topics related to general practice and family medicine, and publishes both quantitative and qualitative original research, editorials, discussion and analysis papers and reviews to facilitate continuing professional development in family medicine. The journal''s topics range broadly and include: • Clinical family medicine • Epidemiological research • Qualitative research • Health services research.
×
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