Fewer X-rays while maintaining quality of clinical care with protocolled physical diagnostics in ankle injuries;Minder rontgenfoto's en toch goede klinische zorg door geprotocolleerde fysische diagnostiek bij enkelletsels

Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde

Volumn 144, Issue 5, 2000, Pages 224-228

  Van Riet, Y E A ^a,b   Van Der Schouw, Y T ^a,b   Van Der Werken, Chr ^a  

^a JEROEN BOSCH HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANKLE FRACTURE; ANKLE INJURY; ANKLE RADIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; CLINICAL EXAMINATION; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; RADIODIAGNOSIS; X RAY; ADULT; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; FOLLOW UP; FRACTURE; INJURY; METHODOLOGY; NETHERLANDS; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RADIOGRAPHY; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTILIZATION REVIEW;

ADULT; ANKLE INJURIES; CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; FRACTURES, BONE; HUMANS; NETHERLANDS; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RADIOGRAPHY; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPRAINS AND STRAINS;

EID: 0034727977     PISSN: 00282162     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Gleadhill DNS, Thomson JY, Simms P. Can more efficient use be made of X-ray examinations in the accident and emergency department? Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1987;294:943-7.
2. Brand DA, Frazier WH, Kohlhepp WC, Shea KM, Hoefer AM, Ecker MD, et al. A protocol for selecting patients with injured extremities who need X-rays. N Engl J Med 1982;306:333-9.
3. Vargish T. Clarke WR, Young RA, Jensen A. The ankle injury -indications for the selective use of X-rays. Injury 1983;14:507-12
4. Diehr P, Higley R, Dekhordi F, Wood R, Krueger L, Teitz C, et al. Prediction of fractures in patients with acute musculoskeletal ankle trauma. Med Decis Making 1988;8:40-7.
5. Dunlop MG, Beattie TF, White GK, Raab GM, Doull RI. Guidelines for selective radiological assessment of inversion in ankle injury. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1986;293:603-5.
6. Svenson J. Need for radiographs in the acutely injured ankle. Lancet 1988;1:244-5.
7. Matthews MG. Guidelines for selective radiological assessment of inversion ankle injuries. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1986;293:957.
8. Stiell IG, Greenberg GH, McKnight RD, Nair RC, McDowell I, Worthington JR. A study to develop clinical decision rules for the use of radiography in acute ankle injuries. Ann Emerg Med 1992; 21:384-90.
9. Stiell IG, Greenberg GH, McKnight RD, Nair RC, McDowell I, Reardon M, et al. Decision rules for the use of radiography in acute ankle injuries. Refinement and prospective validation. JAMA 1993;269:1127-32.
10. Stiell IG, McKnight RD, Greenberg GH, McDowell I, Nair RC, Wells GA, et al. Implementation of the Ottawa ankle rules. JAMA 1994;271:827-32.
11. Stiell IG, Wells G, Laupacis A, Brison R, Verbeek R, Vandemheen K, et al. Multicentre trial to introduce Ottawa ankle rules for use of radiography in acute ankle injuries. Multicentre Ankle Rule Study Group. BMJ 1995;311:594-7.
12. Zwelsloot-Schonk JH, Verhoeff WA, Kievit J, Dam W van. On the use of a hospital information system in evaluating clinical care: a case report. Med Inform (Lond) 1993;18:243-54.
13. Kievit J, Verhoeff WAA, Dijkgraaf PB, Zwetskoot-Schank JHN, Tholen B. Rapport AZL-CBO: sturing van zorgverlening, kwaliteit en informatie. Budgettering op de afdeling Algemene Heelkunde, kostenonderzoek en informatievoorziening. Utrecht: Nationaal Ziekenhuis Instituut; 1991. p. 19-35.
14. Schouw YT van der, Verbeek ALM, Ruijs JHJ. De ROC-curve voor de eerste evaluatie van nieuwe diagnostische tests. Huisarts Wet 1992;35:204-8.
15. Anis AH, Stiell IG, Stewart DG, Laupacis A. Cost-effectiveness analysis of the Ottawa Ankle Rules. Ann Emerg Med 1995;26:422-8.
16. Michelson JD, Ahn U, Magid D. Economic analysis of roentgenogram use in the closed treatment of stable ankle fractures. J Trauma 1995;39:1119-22.