Appropriate use of echocardiography in an Australian regional centre

A Quality Improvement Initiative for Echocardiogram Ordering Patterns in an Academic Hospital

Background Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) for echocardiography are a useful tool to deliver quality healthcare. Our quality-based interventional study was designed to assess the trends in appropriate utilization rates for echocardiography in our institution and improve adherence to the AUC criteria for transthoracic echocardiograms (TTE). Methodology A prospective, time series analysis was conducted at the Upstate University Hospital for the months of July 2019 and August 2020. A chart analysis was performed on 620 consecutive inpatients who underwent TTE for the month of July 2019. We assessed the trends of the appropriate ordering of TTEs. We then updated our order form incorporating the 42 most common appropriate indications. A post-intervention chart analysis was performed on all inpatient TTEs ordered for the month of August 2020 (n = 410). The appropriateness of the TTE for the entire group was determined based on the true indication per chart review. The primary outcome was the proportion of appropriate and inappropriate TTEs ordered. Secondary outcomes included assessing for concordance between the indication on the order requisition form and by chart review. A p-value <0.05 was considered significant. Results Using the 2011 AUC for the entire group, 81% of the pre-intervention TTEs and 79.5% of the post-intervention TTEs were appropriate (p = 0.55). There was a statistically significant reduction in the number of discordant TTE orders before and after the intervention (p < 0.01). In addition, we noted increased appropriateness of TTEs in the concordant group both pre and post-intervention. Conclusions Our study demonstrates a significant increase in the concordance between the TTE order sheet and actual indication per chart review with the intervention. This can translate into improved scanning and physician reading quality and time, thereby increasing focus on areas of interest according to the true indication. There was no significant increase in the appropriate TTEs ordered.

Accuracy of Highly Limited Echocardiographic Screening Images for Determining a Structurally Normal Heart: The Quick-Six Study

INTRODUCTION

Experienced echocardiographers can quickly glean diagnostic information from limited echocardiographic views. The use of limited cardiac ultrasound, particularly as a screening tool, is increasing. During the COVID-19 pandemic, limited cardiac ultrasound has the major advantage of reducing exposure time between sonographer and patient. The sensitivity and negative predictive value of a "screening" echocardiogram with highly limited views is uncertain.

AIM/METHOD

We examined the accuracy of limited echocardiography in 203 consecutive, de novo studies. We used six images: parasternal long axis, with colour Doppler over the mitral valve, and aortic valve, and apical four-chamber with colour Doppler over the mitral valve, and tricuspid valve. We compared the interpretation of 12 subjects with the final echocardiogram report, (gold standard). The subjects comprised four experienced echocardiography-specialised cardiologists, four experienced cardiologists with non-imaging subspecialty interests, and four senior cardiac sonographers. Studies were graded as: (1) normal or (2) needs full study (due to inadequate images or abnormality detected). Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, positive predictive value and accuracy are reported.

RESULTS

Forty-one per cent (41%) of studies were normal by the gold standard report. Overall, a screening echocardiogram had a sensitivity of 71.2%, specificity of 57.1% to detect an abnormal echocardiogram, negative predictive value 58.4%, positive predictive value of 70.2%, and accuracy of 65.4%. When inadequate images were excluded, overall accuracy was nearly identical at 64.6%. The overall accuracy between the three groups of interpreters was similar: 66.5% (95% CI 63.1-69.7) for echocardiography-specialised cardiologists, 65.3% (95% CI 61.9-68.5) for non-echocardiography specialised cardiologists, and 64.4% (95% CI 61.0-67.7) for sonographers. These groups are all highly experienced practitioners. There was no difference in sensitivity or specificity comparing echocardiography-specialised cardiologists with cardiologists of other subspecialty experience. Comparing cardiologists to sonographers, cardiologists had lower sensitivity (echocardiography specialists 67.6%, 95% CI 63.2-71.8, non-echocardiography specialists 62.0%, 95% CI 57.4-66.4) compared to sonographers (84.0% [95% CI 80.4-87.2, p<0.05]), but cardiologists had higher specificities (64.9% [95% CI 59.5-70.0] for the echocardiography specialists, and 69.9% [95% CI 64.7-74.8] for non echocardiography specialists), compared to 36.6% (95% CI 31.4-42.0, p<0.05) for the sonographer group. When looking at only the studies considered to be interpretable, cardiologists had higher positive predictive value (echocardiography specialists 73.7%, 95% CI 69.0-78.1, non echocardiography specialists 74.1%, 95% CI 68.8-79.9), as compared to sonographers (64.3%, 95% CI 59.8-68.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Limited cardiac ultrasound as a screening tool for a normal heart had a sensitivity of only 71%, when performed and interpreted by experienced personnel, raising questions regarding the safety of this practice. Caution is especially recommended in extrapolating its use to non-specialised settings.

A systematic review of Appropriate Use Criteria for transthoracic echocardiography: are they relevant outside the United States?

INTRODUCTION

The 2011 Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) were developed by the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE) to provide guidance for referring physicians in response to growing concerns about unnecessary transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) requests. Very few studies have assessed how medical centers overseas perform against AUC. Evidence is now emerging that inappropriate referral rates in Europe are similar to those reported in the US.

OBJECTIVE

This study systematically reviewed published evidence to identify (1) whether the 2011 AUC are applicable to medical centers outside the US (2) the level of adherence to the AUC across multiple centers, (3) the main factors which cause deviation from AUC, (4) any changes in referral rates since the publication of AUC, and (5) any factors and/or intervention strategies which promote adherence to AUC.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Electronic databases were systematically searched for papers related to AUC and cardiac imaging. Following screening and application of eligibility criteria, data was extracted from ten reports involving 8561 TTE studies. Classification rates were 99.5 and 98% for US studies and studies outside the US respectively. Overall, 7119 TTE studies were classified as appropriate (83.1%) of which 3724 were US referrals (84.7%) and 3395 originated outside the US (81.5%). Six of the included studies independently observed significantly more appropriate referrals among inpatients compared to outpatients (p < 0.001). US centers observed no significant difference in appropriate referral rates between physician specialties while one UK study showed cardiac surgeons ordered inappropriate TTEs more frequently than other specialties (p < 0.05). This review found no obvious trend in appropriate referral rates between 2012 and 2015 indicating no temporal change in physician ordering patterns. Only one educational interventional study met the author's criteria which showed that while intervention was effective during its implantation (26% reduction in TTEs ordered per day), TTE referral rates regressed to pre-intervention levels overtime.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, the American guideline AUC are applicable to centers outside the US and their implementation across five international centers suggest almost 1 in 5 scans could be avoided.

Role of telehealth in perioperative medicine for regional and rural patients in Queensland

BACKGROUND

Australians living in regional, rural and remote areas face a myriad of complexities resulting in a trend to poorer health outcomes. Telehealth is being utilised as an alternative mode of service delivery to overcome such barriers. However, there is limited published information concerning the use of telehealth in perioperative medicine.

AIMS

To review the performance of the telehealth preoperative assessment service at Mater Hospital Brisbane to determine last-minute cancellation rates secondary to medical reasons.

METHODS

A retrospective chart audit of all patients referred to perioperative medicine telehealth consultation services was provided at Mater Hospital Brisbane.

RESULTS

During a 1-year period, 229 patients across eight surgical subspecialties were referred for telehealth assessment (85 females, 144 males) with a median age of 67 years. Patients lived a median distance of 1597 km from Brisbane. Of the 229 patients included in the study, 7 (3.1%) experienced last-minute cancellations. From these data, the last-minute cancellation rate due to medical reasons was 1.3%, which is consistent with the international average.

CONCLUSION

The Mater Hospital Perioperative Medicine Telehealth Programme is a means of providing comprehensive perioperative assessment to regional, rural and remote patients that result in reduced last-minute surgical cancellations and surgery within or below the national recommended guidelines.

Development and validation of a screening tool for the identification of inappropriate transthoracic echocardiograms

OBJECTIVE

We sought whether simple clinical markers could be used in a questionnaire for recognition of inappropriate (or rarely appropriate, RA) tests at point-of-service. Most applications of appropriateness criteria (AC) for transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) have been at the point of order, but a simple means of identifying RA tests in an audit process would be of value.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

The study was performed in 2 major hospitals in Tasmania. 2 reviewers created a questionnaire based on 4 questions most commonly associated with RA (suspected endocarditis with no positive blood cultures or new murmur, lack of cardiovascular symptoms or no change in clinical status or cardiac examination, routine surveillance and previous TTE within a year) in a derivation cohort of 814 patients. This was prospectively applied to 499 TTEs to calculate sensitivity and specificity for prediction of RA, and validated in the external group (n=880).

RESULTS

Of 499 prospective TTEs, the questionnaire selected 18% requests as being potentially RA. As 7.4% were actually RA (κ 89%), the sensitivity and specificity of the questionnaire were 84% and 87%, respectively. In the external validation cohort, the model found 11% requests needed to be screened for appropriateness with a sensitivity and specificity of 80% and 95%.

CONCLUSIONS

A questionnaire based on 4 questions detects a high proportion of RA TTE, and could be used for audit.

Appropriate Use Criteria in Echocardiography: An Observational Institutional Study with the Perspective of a Quality Improvement Project

BACKGROUND

Appropriate use criteria (AUC) in echocardiography are essential tools for aligning the indications of echocardiography with the best clinical standards, improving clinical outcome, restraining abuse, and preserving health-care resources.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to ascertain the AUC for transthoracic echocardiography in a university hospital and create a quality improvement project (QIP).

METHODS

The assessment of 501 inpatients who received transthoracic cardiac echo was conducted according to the 2011 AUC report. Indications were classified as appropriate, uncertain, or inappropriate, and patients not matching any of the abovementioned divisions were grouped in the nonfitting category.

RESULTS

Of the 501 eligible patients, 374 patients (74.66%) were in the appropriate group, 85 patients (16.96%) in the inappropriate group, 20 patients (3.99%) in the uncertain group, and 22 patients (4.39%) in the nonfitting category.

DISCUSSION

Interpretation and analysis of the obtained results are presented, along with the results of many comparable studies; moreover, a QIP was set up accordingly.

CONCLUSION

AUC are useful to assess local practice, preserve health-care resources, and improve clinical outcome.