Inter-observer agreement on levels of evidence in radiology articles.

Levels of evidence (LE) are established through a hierarchical classification of studies according to their design. At present, there are many heterogeneous LE classifications, and this hampers their applicability. Our study aims to identify which LE classification has the best interobserver concordance for radiology articles. For this purpose, an interobserver agreement analysis were performed on 105 original articles applying two NE scales (Oxford Center of Evidence Based Medicine (OCEBM) y National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC)). The inter-rater agreement of the LE assigned after reading the abstracts was good when using the OCEBM scale (K = 0.679), and somewhat lower with the NHMRC (K = 0.577 -moderate-). All differences were statistically significant (P < .000). So, in conclusion, of the two scales analysed (OCEBM and NHMRC), the OCEBM led to the strongest level of inter-rater agreement.

Framework for health care quality and evidence-based practice in radiology departments: A regional study on radiographer's perceptions.

INTRODUCTION: The main goals of this study were to describe, in an integrated and multidimensional way, the conditions related to the quality of care in radiology departments from Algarve (Portugal), to assess the perspective of radiographers on the use of scientific evidence in clinical practice and to validate a model that characterizes the conditions for continuous improvement. METHODS: A cross sectional study was performed in four radiology departments from public and private healthcare facilities from Algarve region (Portugal). A paper-based survey was sent to all radiographers to assess the quality systems implemented in their radiology departments and their perspective on the use of scientific evidence in clinical practice. RESULTS: In total, 62 radiographers (61.4%) completed the survey. The quality dimensions that obtained the highest degree of compliance were the existence of quality assurance and improvement activities (43.0%), existence of standards in clinical practice of radiographers (42.7%) and the existence of special provisions (37.6%). The quality dimension related to patient's involvement was the one with the lowest level of compliance. Moreover, from the radiographers perspective, positive responses were obtained related to evidence-based actions (83.0%), sources of evidence (76.0%) and the significance of research activities (74.0%). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that a new framework based on four factors (Support for Information; Organizational Capability to Technical Quality of Care; Patient Involvement and Evidence-Based Radiology), should be considered in the establishment of strategic policies that better define the provision of diagnostic procedures and professional practices in radiology departments from Algarve region, based on quality improvement systems and better patient safety. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: There is a need to include patients in the decision-making process, to involve radiographers in quality assurance and improvement activities and to implement quality monitoring mechanisms within radiology departments under study.

Jordanian Radiologists' Perspectives and Application of Evidence-Based Radiology in Clinical Practice.

PURPOSE: To evaluate radiologists' education, knowledge and skills of research, attitude toward evidence-based radiology (EBR), understanding of terms and use of related published work in clinical practice and the association between these variables and sociodemographic characteristics. We also aim to assess the availability of resources and to identify sources and the main barriers to implementing EBR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 87 radiologists completed a questionnaire, which consisted of eight sections related to radiologists' demographic characteristics, and EBR-related questions. Descriptive statistics were used, and the association between EBR-related parts and sociodemographic characteristics was performed. RESULTS: Ninety-three percent of the radiologists believed that EBR is necessary in practice. Only 40% received formal training in search strategies and 29.9% in critical appraisal of research literature during academic preparation. Moreover, 21-62% of the respondents completely understand specific terms related to EBR. Sixty-three percent stated that they can access relevant databases and the Internet at workplace. Research articles were only used by 24% to make a clinical decision. Almost 50% reported that they read or reviewed ≤1 article per month. The primary barrier to implementing EBR was the lack of colleagues' support. Understanding terms and the number of articles used in clinical decision were significantly related to education (P-value=0.001, 0.007) and hospital section (P-value=0.002, 0.027) respectively. CONCLUSION: Radiologists showed positive attitude toward EBR. However, there is a lack in information resources, colleagues' support, use of published literature, understanding of research terms and the ability of radiologists to access relevant databases at workplaces.

How to Perform a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Imaging Studies.

A systematic review is a comprehensive search, critical evaluation, and synthesis of all the relevant studies on a specific (clinical) topic that can be applied to the evaluation of diagnostic and screening imaging studies. It can be a qualitative or a quantitative (meta-analysis) review of available literature. A meta-analysis uses statistical methods to combine and summarize the results of several studies. In this review, a 12-step approach to performing a systematic review (and meta-analysis) is outlined under the four domains: (1) Problem Formulation and Data Acquisition, (2) Quality Appraisal of Eligible Studies, (3) Statistical Analysis of Quantitative Data, and (4) Clinical Interpretation of the Evidence. This review is specifically geared toward the performance of a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy (imaging) studies.

Gouty arthritis: the diagnostic and therapeutic impact of dual-energy CT.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the diagnostic and therapeutic impact of dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) in gout. METHODS: Forty-three patients with (n = 20) and without a history of gout (n = 23) showing non-specific soft tissue deposits underwent DECT after unrewarding arthrocentesis. Two blinded, independent readers evaluated DECT for the presence of urate crystals. Clinical diagnosis, clinically suspected urate crystal locations, diagnostic thinking and therapeutic decisions were noted before and after DECT. Clinical 1-month follow-up was obtained. RESULTS: DECT showed urate in 26/43 patients (60 %). After DECT, clinical diagnosis of gout was withdrawn in 17/43 (40 %) and was maintained in 16/43 patients (37 %). In 10/43 patients (23 %) the diagnosis was maintained, but DECT revealed urate in clinically unsuspected locations. In 23/43 patients (53 %), a treatment-change based on DECT occurred. Changes in diagnostic thinking occurred more frequently in patients without a history of gout (p < 0.001), changes in therapeutic decisions more frequently in patients with a history of gout (p = 0.014). Clinical follow-up indicated beneficial effects of DECT-based diagnoses in 83 % of patients. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with or without a history of gout and a recent suspicion for gouty arthritis with an unrewarding arthrocentesis, DECT has a marked diagnostic and therapeutic impact when hyperdense soft-tissue deposits are present. KEY POINTS: • This study evaluates the concept of evidence-based radiology • In patients with suspected gout, DECT can help clinicians make the diagnosis • DECT has a marked impact on therapy • Clinical follow-up after 1 month indicated reliable results of DECT.

[Key aspects in interpreting clinical trials in radiology]. / El ensayo clínico en Radiología: claves para su interpretación.

A clinical trial is an experimental study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a treatment or diagnostic technique in human beings. To ensure the methodological quality of a clinical trial and the validity of its results, various checklists have been elaborated to identify biases that could invalidate its conclusions. This article focuses on the points we need to consider in the critical evaluation of a clinical trial. We can usually find this information in the "materials and methods" and "results" sections of articles. Randomization, follow-up (or analysis of losses), blinding, and equivalence between groups (apart from the intervention itself) are some key aspects related to design. In the "results" section, we need to consider what measures of clinical efficacy were used (relative risk, odds ratio, or number needed to treat, among others) and the precision of the results (confidence intervals). Once we have confirmed that the clinical trial fulfills these criteria, we need to determine whether the results can be applied in our environment and whether the benefits obtained justify the risks and costs involved.

[The six steps necessary in elaborating critically appraised topics]. / Los 6 pasos necesarios para elaborar Critically Appraised Topics.

Different types of critically appraised topics (CATs) can be elaborated in diagnostic imaging: comparison of diagnostic tests, evaluation of techniques for early detection (screening), economical analyses, or therapeutic aspects, among others. Their design will vary in function of the question they aim to answer. For example, for treatment evaluation, clinical trials are the best, but if there are secondary studies (systematic reviews or meta-analyses) that synthesize information from several studies, the results will be more important and the scientific conclusions will be more relevant. Regardless of the study design used, the elaboration of a CAT will involve six steps: 1) question; 2) systematic and efficient bibliographic search; 3) levels of evidence (choosing the articles that have the best level); 4) critical reading of the articles chosen; 5) applying conclusions to the context, and 6) recommendations. In this article, we will describe these steps and the nuances for different types of studies in each step.

[Critically appraised topics (CATs): a new publishing opportunity in Radiología]. / Critically Appraised Topics: una nueva oportunidad de publicación en Radiología.

Physicians need fast access to quality information about the best diagnostic tests and treatments in each case. To meet this need, a new publishing format has emerged. Critically appraised topics (CATs) are elaborated following the five steps of evidence-based medicine. CATs are structured summaries of research articles that deal with a specific clinical query, presenting a critical evaluation of the best evidence available to support the validity of the available options. CATs have proven useful in teaching evidence-based radiology and this publishing format is becoming more common. Radiology CATs can be found on medical websites and in journals, including those dedicated to general medicine as well as those specifically dedicated to radiology. Radiología encourages the publication of CATs because we consider that they can be useful for daily decision making.

Conceptos actuales en la radiología basada en evidencias: revisión / A review of current concepts in evidence-based radiology

La medicina basada en evidencias (MBE) se fundamenta en un descubrimiento sistemático, evaluación crítica y utilización de la investigación actual publicada en la literatura médica, para la toma de decisiones referentes al cuidado de un paciente individual o políticas de salud. En la radiología (incluyendo sus ramas diagnóstica y terapéutica), los principios y práctica de una MBE han recibido atención limitada. En esta breve revisión, presentamos algunos conceptos básicos de cómo implementar una radiología basada en evidencias y los conceptos y etapas de la MBE y el metaanálisis con enfoque en la radiología basada en evidencias. Se identifican las aplicaciones de ésta en la práctica, la educación y la investigación, y las habilidades requeridas. La aplicación de los principios de la MBE en el diagnóstico por imagen facilita la interpretación de los estudios y sustenta una evaluación bien dirigida. Esta revisión será útil para radiólogos en cualquier etapa de su entrenamiento o desarrollo profesional, con el fin de estimular una práctica radiológica basada en evidencias, especialmente en países en desarrollo.

It has been noted that "Good doctors use both individual clinical expertise and the best available external evidence, and neither alone is enough." Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is defined as the process of systematically finding, critically appraising, and using contemporary research published in the medical literature as a basis to make decisions regarding individual patient care and health care policy. In radiology, including its diagnostic and interventional aspects, the principles and practice of EBM have not been thoroughly studied. In this brief review article, we describe key aspects of evidence-based radiology (EBR), concepts and steps followed in EBM and meta-analysis. The skills required to practice EBR are identified, and the roles of EBR in radiologic practice, education, and research are discussed. The application of EBM principles to diagnostic imaging facilitates the interpretation of imaging studies and produces a sound and comprehensive radiologic evaluation. This review could be useful for radiologists and clinicians at any stage of their training or career. It encourages the practice of EBM and EBR especially in developing countries.