Adequacy and quality of abdominal echographies requested by primary care professionals

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The value of abdominal echography in primary care is great because it is innocuous, inexpensive, easy to perform and provides a great deal of information making this the first examination to be requested in cases of probable abdominal disease. <b>However, too many abdominal echographies are probably requested overcrowding the Departments of Radiodiagnosis with not always justified petitions or with repetition of tests based on little clinical criteria</b>.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p><b>The aim of the study is </b>to evaluate the adequacy and quality of abdominal echographies requested by primary care physicians in the Maresme County (North of Barcelona), develop guidelines for indicating echographies and reevaluate this adequacy after implementing these guidelines.</p> <p>We will perform a two-phase study: the first descriptive, and retrospective evaluating the adequacy and quality of petitions for abdominal echographies, and in the second phase we will evaluate the impact of recommendations for indicating abdominal echographies for PC physicians on the adequacy and quality of echography petitions thereafter.</p> <p><b>This study will be carried out in 10 primary care centres </b>in the Maresme (Barcelona).</p> <p>1067 abdominal echographies requested by primary care physicians from the above mentioned centres from January 2007 to April 2010 and referred to the Department of Radiology and the same number of applications after the intervention.</p> <p>All the petitions for abdominal echographies requested will be analysed and the clinical histories will be obtained to determine demographic variables, the reason for the visit and for the echography petition and diagnostic orientation, clinical and echographic data, evaluation of the echographies according to the quality and variables characterising the professionals requesting the echographies including: age, sex, laboral situation, length of time in work post, formation, etc.</p> <p>To achieve a consensus of the adequacy of abdominal echography, a work group including gastroenterologists, radiologists and general practitioners will be created following the nominal group. This will allow the design of guidelines for the indication of abdominal echography and posterior evaluation of their impact among physicians by diffusion and posterior reevaluation of the adequacy of the petitions.</p

Magnetic resonance enterography, small bowel ultrasound and colonoscopy to diagnose and stage Crohn’s disease; patient acceptability, and perceived burden

Objectives: To compare patient acceptability and burden of magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) and ultrasound (US) to each other, and to other enteric investigations, particularly colonoscopy. Methods: 159 patients (mean age 38, 94 female) with newly diagnosed or relapsing Crohn’s disease, prospectively recruited to a multicentre diagnostic accuracy study comparing MRE and US, completed an experience questionnaire on the burden and acceptability of small bowel investigations between December 2013 and September 2016. Acceptability, recovery time, scan burden and willingness to repeat the test were analysed using the Wilcoxon signed rank and McNemar tests; and group differences in scan burden with Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Results: Overall, 128 (88%) patients rated MRE as very or fairly acceptable, lower than US (144, 99%; p<0.001), but greater than colonoscopy (60, 60%; p<0.001). MRE recovery time was longer than US (p<0.001), but shorter than colonoscopy (p<0.001). Patients were less willing to undergo MRE again than US (127 vs 133, 91% vs. 99%; p=0.012), but more willing than for colonoscopy (68, 75%; p=0.017). MRE generated greater burden than US (p<0.001), although burden scores were low. Younger age and emotional distress were associated with greater MRE and US burden. Higher MRE discomfort was associated with patient preference for US (p=0.053). Patients rated test accuracy as more important than scan discomfort. Conclusions.: MRE and US are well tolerated. Although MRE generates greater burden, longer recovery, and is less preferred than US, it is more acceptable than colonoscopy. Patients however place greater emphasis on diagnostic accuracy than burden

WSES Guidelines for the management of acute left sided colonic diverticulitis in the emergency setting

Acute left sided colonic diverticulitis is one of the most common clinical conditions encountered by surgeons in acute setting. A World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) Consensus Conference on acute diverticulitis was held during the 3rd World Congress of the WSES in Jerusalem, Israel, on July 7th, 2015. During this consensus conference the guidelines for the management of acute left sided colonic diverticulitis in the emergency setting were presented and discussed. This document represents the executive summary of the final guidelines approved by the consensus conference.Peer reviewe