Appropriate Use of Cardiac Stress Testing with Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Appropriate use criteria (AUC) for cardiac stress tests address concerns about utilization growth and patient safety. We systematically reviewed studies of appropriateness, including within physician specialties; evaluated trends over time and in response to AUC updates; and characterized leading in...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Joseph A Ladapo, Saul Blecker, Michael O'Donnell, Saahil A Jumkhawala, Pamela S Douglas
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2016-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4990235?pdf=render
id doaj-8b91767f3ac848ce8ca1d5e4afe52855
record_format Article
spelling doaj-8b91767f3ac848ce8ca1d5e4afe528552020-11-25T02:43:08ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032016-01-01118e016115310.1371/journal.pone.0161153Appropriate Use of Cardiac Stress Testing with Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Joseph A LadapoSaul BleckerMichael O'DonnellSaahil A JumkhawalaPamela S DouglasAppropriate use criteria (AUC) for cardiac stress tests address concerns about utilization growth and patient safety. We systematically reviewed studies of appropriateness, including within physician specialties; evaluated trends over time and in response to AUC updates; and characterized leading indications for inappropriate/rarely appropriate testing.We searched PubMed (2005-2015) for English-language articles reporting stress echocardiography or myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) appropriateness. Data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression.Thirty-four publications of 41,578 patients were included, primarily from academic centers. Stress echocardiography appropriate testing rates were 53.0% (95% CI, 45.3%-60.7%) and 50.9% (42.6%-59.2%) and inappropriate/rarely appropriate rates were 19.1% (11.4%-26.8%) and 28.4% (23.9%-32.8%) using 2008 and 2011 AUC, respectively. Stress MPI appropriate testing rates were 71.1% (64.5%-77.7%) and 72.0% (67.6%-76.3%) and inappropriate/rarely appropriate rates were 10.7% (7.2%-14.2%) and 15.7% (12.4%-19.1%) using 2005 and 2009 AUC, respectively. There was no significant temporal trend toward rising rates of appropriateness for stress echocardiography or MPI. Unclassified stress echocardiograms fell by 79% (p = 0.04) with updated AUC. There were no differences between cardiac specialists and internists.Rates of appropriate use tend to be lower for stress echocardiography compared to MPI, and updated AUC reduced unclassified stress echocardiograms. There is no conclusive evidence that AUC improved appropriate use over time. Further research is needed to determine if integration of appropriateness guidelines in academic and community settings is an effective approach to optimizing inappropriate/rarely appropriate use of stress testing and its associated costs and patient harms.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4990235?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Joseph A Ladapo
Saul Blecker
Michael O'Donnell
Saahil A Jumkhawala
Pamela S Douglas
spellingShingle Joseph A Ladapo
Saul Blecker
Michael O'Donnell
Saahil A Jumkhawala
Pamela S Douglas
Appropriate Use of Cardiac Stress Testing with Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Joseph A Ladapo
Saul Blecker
Michael O'Donnell
Saahil A Jumkhawala
Pamela S Douglas
author_sort Joseph A Ladapo
title Appropriate Use of Cardiac Stress Testing with Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
title_short Appropriate Use of Cardiac Stress Testing with Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
title_full Appropriate Use of Cardiac Stress Testing with Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
title_fullStr Appropriate Use of Cardiac Stress Testing with Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
title_full_unstemmed Appropriate Use of Cardiac Stress Testing with Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
title_sort appropriate use of cardiac stress testing with imaging: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2016-01-01
description Appropriate use criteria (AUC) for cardiac stress tests address concerns about utilization growth and patient safety. We systematically reviewed studies of appropriateness, including within physician specialties; evaluated trends over time and in response to AUC updates; and characterized leading indications for inappropriate/rarely appropriate testing.We searched PubMed (2005-2015) for English-language articles reporting stress echocardiography or myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) appropriateness. Data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression.Thirty-four publications of 41,578 patients were included, primarily from academic centers. Stress echocardiography appropriate testing rates were 53.0% (95% CI, 45.3%-60.7%) and 50.9% (42.6%-59.2%) and inappropriate/rarely appropriate rates were 19.1% (11.4%-26.8%) and 28.4% (23.9%-32.8%) using 2008 and 2011 AUC, respectively. Stress MPI appropriate testing rates were 71.1% (64.5%-77.7%) and 72.0% (67.6%-76.3%) and inappropriate/rarely appropriate rates were 10.7% (7.2%-14.2%) and 15.7% (12.4%-19.1%) using 2005 and 2009 AUC, respectively. There was no significant temporal trend toward rising rates of appropriateness for stress echocardiography or MPI. Unclassified stress echocardiograms fell by 79% (p = 0.04) with updated AUC. There were no differences between cardiac specialists and internists.Rates of appropriate use tend to be lower for stress echocardiography compared to MPI, and updated AUC reduced unclassified stress echocardiograms. There is no conclusive evidence that AUC improved appropriate use over time. Further research is needed to determine if integration of appropriateness guidelines in academic and community settings is an effective approach to optimizing inappropriate/rarely appropriate use of stress testing and its associated costs and patient harms.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4990235?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT josephaladapo appropriateuseofcardiacstresstestingwithimagingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT saulblecker appropriateuseofcardiacstresstestingwithimagingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT michaelodonnell appropriateuseofcardiacstresstestingwithimagingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT saahilajumkhawala appropriateuseofcardiacstresstestingwithimagingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT pamelasdouglas appropriateuseofcardiacstresstestingwithimagingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
_version_ 1724771313335140352