Highlights of the 2009 Scientific Session of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology: Minneapolis, Minnesota, October 1-4, 2009.
Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, 333 Cedar Street, FMP 3, New Haven, CT 06520, USA.Journal of Nuclear Cardiology (Impact Factor: 2.65). 01/2010; 17(1):97-105. DOI: 10.1007/s12350-009-9177-7
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology 07/2007; 13(6). DOI:10.1016/j.cardfail.2007.06.494 · 2.65 Impact Factor
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology 07/2007; 13(6). DOI:10.1016/j.cardfail.2007.06.493 · 2.65 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Appropriate use criteria (AUC) were developed to guide the use of myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI). While MPI use has grown exponentially, women remain under tested. Given this bias in testing, we sought to determine if gender disparity exists in tests categorized by appropriateness and the role of referral bias. The AUC were applied to 314 consecutive MPI. Analysis of variance and chi-squared tests were used for analysis. Gender disparity was assessed using correlation matrices comparing baseline to gender reversed data. Of the 314 studies, 263 were appropriate, 34 inappropriate, and 17 uncertain. Women had 68% of inappropriate studies, and 82% of uncertain studies (P < .01). Cardiologists ordered more appropriate studies than primary care physicians (PCPs) in women (86% vs 71%, P = .04). Among studies ordered by cardiologists and PCPs, a higher percentage of studies were appropriate in men vs women (96% vs 86%, P = 0.05 and 88% vs 71% P = .003), respectively. Gender reversal demonstrates disparity in the AUC tool with 46 (15%) not correlating (P < .00001). Comparing patient gender and ordering physician, the majority of inappropriate and uncertain studies were ordered in women by PCPs, indicating a continuing need for education among PCPs, particularly as the AUC apply to women.Journal of Nuclear Cardiology 04/2011; 18(4):588-94. DOI:10.1007/s12350-011-9368-x · 2.65 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.