A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Adherence to the 2010 American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria for Cardiac Computed Tomography: Quality Analysis at a Tertiary Referral Center. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Background: In November 2010, the American College of Cardiology Foundation published revised appropriateness criteria (AC) for cardiac computed tomography (CT). We evaluated adherence to these criteria by providers of different subspecialties at a tertiary referral center.

Methods: Reports of 383 consecutive patients who underwent clinically indicated cardiac CT from December 1, 2010, to July 31, 2011, were reviewed by physicians with appropriate training in cardiac CT. Scans were classified as appropriate, inappropriate, or uncertain based on the revised 2010 AC. Studies that did not fall under any of the specified indications were labeled as unclassified. Adherence to the AC was also analyzed as a function of provider type. Research scans were excluded from this analysis.

Results: Three hundred eight exams (80%) were classified as appropriate; 26 (7%), as inappropriate; 30 (8%), as uncertain; and 19 (5%), as unclassified. Of the 19 (5%) unclassified cardiac CT exams, the most common indication was for evaluation of suspected aortic dissection. Three hundred five exams (80%) were referred by cardiologists; 73 (19%), by internists; and 5 (1%), by neurologists. Of the 305 cardiology-referred studies, 221 (73%) were ordered by general cardiologists; 28 (9%), by interventional cardiologists; and 56 (19%), by electrophysiologists. There was no significant difference in adherence to the criteria between provider specialties or between cardiology subspecialties (P > 0.05).

Conclusions: high across provider specialties.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000124DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

2010 american
8
american college
8
college cardiology
8
cardiology foundation
8
criteria cardiac
8
cardiac computed
8
computed tomography
8
tertiary referral
8
adherence criteria
8
classified appropriate
8

Similar Publications