Guidelines, training and quality assurance: influence on general practitioner MRI referral quality.

INTRODUCTION Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an accurate diagnostic test used mainly in secondary care. Uncertainty exists regarding the ability of general practitioners (GPs) to use direct access high-tech imaging pathways appropriately when managing musculoskeletal injury. AIM To evaluate the use of primary care-centric guidelines, training and quality assurance on the appropriateness of GP MRI referrals for patients with selected musculoskeletal injuries. METHODS This is an 18-month primary care retrospective study. GPs participated in clinical musculoskeletal training, enabling patient referral for MRI on four body sites. Two reviewers categorised referral appropriateness independently, and reviewer inter-rater agreement between categorisations was measured. MRI results and patient management pathways were described. Associations of scan status and patient management were examined using logistic regression. RESULTS In total, 273 GPs from 72 practices attended training sessions to receive MRI referral accreditation. Of these, 150 (55%) GPs requested 550 MRI scans, with 527 (96%) eligible for analysis, resulting in 86% considered appropriate; 79% consistent with guidelines and 7% clinically useful but for conditions outside of guidelines. Inter-rater agreement was 75%. Cohen's weighted kappa statistic was 0.38 (95% CI: 0.28-0.48). MRI referrals consistent with guidelines were more likely to show pathology requiring specialist intervention (reviewer 1: odds ratio=2.64, 95% CI 1.51-4.62; reviewer 2: odds ratio=4.44, 95% CI 2.47-7.99), compared to scan requests graded not consistent. DISCUSSION Study findings indicate GPs use decision support guidance well, and this has resulted in appropriate MRI referrals and higher specialist intervention rates for selected conditions.

Surrogate and patient discrepancy regarding consent for critical care research.

OBJECTIVE: Critically ill patients frequently display impaired decision-making capacity due to their underlying illness and the use of sedating medications. Healthcare providers often rely on surrogates to make decisions for medical care and participation in clinical research. However, the accuracy of surrogate decisions for a variety of critical care research studies is poorly understood. DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study. SETTING: Academic medical center. PATIENTS: Medical intensive care unit patients and their designated surrogates. INTERVENTION: Patients were asked whether they would consent to participate in hypothetical research studies of increasing complexity, and surrogates independently indicated whether they would consent to enroll the patient in the same scenarios. RESULTS: Overall, 69 medical intensive care unit patients were enrolled into the study. The majority of surrogates were either the spouse (58%) or parent (22%) of the patient. The percentage of patients that would agree to participate in a research study and the percentage of surrogates that would agree to have the patient enrolled into a research study both declined as the risk of the study increased (p < .001 for both analyses). In addition, the overall discrepancy, the false-negative rates, and the false-positive rates between patient and surrogates were greater as the risk of the study increased (p < .001, p < .001, and p = .049, respectively). κ values for all seven scenarios demonstrated less-than-moderate agreement (range 0.03-0.41). CONCLUSIONS: There are significant discrepancies in the willingness to participate in various types of clinical research proposals between critically ill patients and their surrogate decision makers. The results of this study raise concerns about the use of surrogate consent for inclusion of critically ill patients into research protocols.

Severity of acute illness is associated with baseline readiness to change in medical intensive care unit patients with unhealthy alcohol use.

BACKGROUND: Unhealthy alcohol use predisposes to multiple conditions that frequently result in critical illness and is present in up to one-third of patients admitted to a medical intensive care unit (ICU). We sought to determine the baseline readiness to change in medical ICU patients with unhealthy alcohol use and hypothesized that the severity of acute illness would be independently associated with higher scores on readiness to change scales. We further sought to determine whether this effect is modified by the severity of unhealthy alcohol use. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional observational study of current regular drinkers in 3 medical ICUs. The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test was used to differentiate low-risk and unhealthy alcohol use and further categorize patients into risky alcohol use or an alcohol use disorder. The severity of a patient's acute illness was assessed by calculating the Acute Physiologic and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score at the time of admission to the medical ICU. Readiness to change was assessed using standardized questionnaires. RESULTS: Of 101 medical ICU patients who were enrolled, 65 met the criteria for unhealthy alcohol use. The association between the severity of acute illness and readiness to change depended on the instrument used. A higher severity of illness measured by APACHE II score was an independent predictor of readiness to change as assessed by the Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness Scale (Taking Action scale; p < 0.01). When a visual analog scale was used to assess readiness to change, there was a significant association with severity of acute illness (p < 0.01) that was modified by the severity of unhealthy alcohol use (p = 0.04 for interaction term). CONCLUSIONS: Medical ICU patients represent a population where brief interventions require further study. Studies of brief intervention should account for the severity of acute illness and the severity of unhealthy alcohol use as potential effect modifiers.

Ankle-brachial index performance among internal medicine residents.

The ankle-brachial index (ABI) is the standard test used in clinical practice to detect peripheral artery disease (PAD) and is a powerful predictor of adverse cardiovascular outcomes. This study sought to measure the baseline knowledge of the ABI test among a sample of internal medicine residents and to examine the impact of an educational intervention on performance of the test. A total of 29 residents were asked to perform three tasks, with the performance of each task being assessed using a point-based scoring system: measure an ABI on a normal volunteer (15 points), calculate the ABI based on data from a hypothetical patient (3 points), and interpret a range of ABI values (6 points). A standardized educational intervention was then provided and post-education performance was assessed for each task using the same scoring system. At baseline, 4% of residents correctly measured the ABI, 10% correctly calculated the ABI, and 45% correctly interpreted the ABI. Baseline performance was unaffected by year of residency training. Following the educational intervention, 50% of residents correctly measured the ABI, 75% correctly calculated the ABI, and 88% correctly interpreted the ABI. The mean score for the tasks of ABI measurement, calculation and interpretation between baseline and post-education were 4.6 +/- 3 and 13.9 +/- 1.6 (p < 0.0001), 1 +/- 0.9 and 2.3 +/- 1.2 (p = 0.002), and 4.9 +/- 1.6 and 5.9 +/- 0.3 (p = 0.008), respectively. In conclusion, baseline knowledge of the ABI test was poor among a sample of internal medicine residents. These results suggest that instruction regarding the ABI test is deficient in medical school and residency programs and requires action by those responsible for the education of medical students and residents.

The management of subclinical hyperthyroidism by thyroid specialists.

Subclinical hyperthyroidism is a relatively common condition for which prospectively derived evidenced-based management guidelines do not exist. We have conducted a case-based mail survey to solicit opinions from members of the American Thyroid Association (ATA) about various issues that arise in the management of patients with this disorder. The survey was completed and returned by 185 of 300 (62%) of the original survey recipients. Four hypothetical cases varying in age, thyrotropin (TSH) level and underlying etiology were presented. The majority of respondents recommended further evaluation of all cases, most commonly choosing a radioactive iodine uptake (42%-71%), thyroid scan (39%-68%) and antithyroid (TPO/Tg) antibodies (49%-55%) as the additional tests to be ordered. The large majority (84%) recommended observation rather than active treatment for a young patient with a low but detectable serum TSH level. A small majority also recommended observation alone for a young woman with an undetectable serum TSH level (58%) and for an older woman with a low but detectable serum TSH value (63%). However, the majority (66%) favored treating an older woman with an undetectable serum TSH. When treatment was advised in the patients with subclinical hyperthyroidism, the respondents strongly favored anti-thyroid drugs when the etiology was Graves' disease and radioactive iodine when the etiology was toxic nodular thyroid disease. In the absence of adequate evidence-based guidelines, it is hoped that this survey of expert opinions may provide useful guidance for physicians providing care for patients with subclinical hyperthyroidism.