Renal colic imaging practice patterns in Ontario: A population-based study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: Computed tomography (CT) is associated with increased cost and exposure to radiation when compared to ultrasound (US) in patients with renal colic. Consequently, a 2014 Choosing Wisely recommendation states US should be used over CT in uncomplicated presentations in patients under age 50. The objective of this study was to describe imaging practice patterns in Ontario among patients presenting with renal colic and the relationship between initial imaging modality, subsequent imaging, and burden of care indicators. METHODS: This is a population-based study of patients who presented with renal colic in Ontario from 2003-2019 using administrative data. Patients were assessed according to their first imaging modality during their index visit. Descriptive statistics and Chi-squared test were used to examine differences between these groups. The primary outcome was the need for subsequent imaging. Secondary outcomes were length of renal colic episode, days to surgery, and number of emergency department (ED ) and primary care visits during the renal colic episode. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used. RESULTS: A total of 429 060 patients were included in the final analysis. Of those, 50.5% (216 747) had CT as their initial imaging modality, 20% (84 672) had US, and 3% (13 643) had both on the same day. Subsequent imaging was obtained in 40.7% of those who had CT as the initial imaging, compared to 43% in those who had US and 43% who had both. Of those who initially had an US, 38% went on to have at least one CT during their renal colic episode, including those who had CT on the same day as initial US, while 62% were able to avoid CT altogether. In contrast, 17% had a repeat CT after an initial CT at the time of presentation. The overall use of US increased from 15% to 31% during the study period. The length of the renal colic episode was slightly longer in those who had a CT first compared to US in multivariable models (adjusted risk ratio [ARR ] 1.005, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.000-1.009); however, the time to surgery was less in those who had a CT first (ARR 0.831, 95% CI 0.807-0.856). Fewer ED and family physician visits were seen in those who had an initial CT. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with renal colic in Ontario, approximately half have CT as the initial imaging modality despite US being recommended in uncomplicated presentations. While US use remains low, its use doubled during this study period, demonstrating an encouraging trend. Those who have US first can often avoid subsequent CT.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».