Patient Race/Ethnicity and Diagnostic Imaging Utilization in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review

Author(s):  
Alan Shan ◽  
Glenn Baumann ◽  
Ali Gholamrezanezhad
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew B. Ross ◽  
Vivek Kalia ◽  
Brian Y. Chan ◽  
Geng Li

Abstract Background An established body of literature has shown evidence of implicit bias in the health care system on the basis of patient race and ethnicity that contributes to well documented disparities in outcomes. However, little is known about the influence of patient race and ethnicity on the decision to order diagnostic radiology exams in the acute care setting. This study examines the role of patient race and ethnicity on the likelihood of diagnostic imaging exams being ordered during United States emergency department encounters. Methods Publicly available data from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey Emergency Department sample for the years 2006–2016 was compiled. The proportion of patient encounters where diagnostic imaging was ordered was tabulated by race/ethnicity, sub-divided by imaging modality. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to evaluate the influence of patient race/ethnicity on the ordering of diagnostic imaging controlling for other patient and hospital characteristics. Survey weighting variables were used to formulate national-level estimates. Results Using the weighted data, an average of 131,558,553 patient encounters were included each year for the 11-year study period. Imaging was used at 46% of all visits although this varied significantly by patient race and ethnicity with white patients receiving medical imaging at 49% of visits and non-white patients at 41% of visits (p < 0.001). This effect persisted in the controlled regression model and across all imaging modalities with the exception of ultrasound. Other factors with a significant influence on imaging use included patient age, gender, insurance status, number of co-morbidities, hospital setting (urban vs non-urban) and hospital region. There was no evidence to suggest that the disparate use of imaging by patient race and ethnicity changed over the 11-year study time period. Conclusion The likelihood that a diagnostic imaging exam will be ordered during United States emergency department encounters differs significantly by patient race and ethnicity even when controlling for other patient and hospital characteristics. Further work must be done to understand and mitigate what may represent systematic bias and ensure equitable use of health care resources.


Author(s):  
Morgan Congdon ◽  
Stephanie A. Schnell ◽  
Tatiana Londoño Gentile ◽  
Jennifer A. Faerber ◽  
Christopher P. Bonafide ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 100 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jin Sun Lee ◽  
Joshua Tamayo-Sarver ◽  
Patricia Kinneer ◽  
Cherri Hobgood

2020 ◽  
Vol 55 (5) ◽  
pp. 741-772 ◽  
Author(s):  
Woolton Lee ◽  
Jennifer T. Lloyd ◽  
Katherine Giuriceo ◽  
Timothy Day ◽  
William Shrank ◽  
...  

CJEM ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (S1) ◽  
pp. S125-S125
Author(s):  
H. Wong ◽  
K. Sidhu ◽  
R. Margau ◽  
M. Fam ◽  
C. Sistrom ◽  
...  

Introduction: Use of diagnostic imaging in the emergency department (ED) has significantly increased over time. The decision to use a certain type of imaging, if any at all, is not always clear. Accordingly, concerns of appropriateness are justified. A starting point to assess imaging appropriateness is to measure variation in its use. It has been suggested that where large variation exists, there may be inappropriate use. Methods: We retrospectively studied consecutive ED visits at North York General Hospital between April 1, 2009 and March 31, 2013 (n = 316,251), and developed a two-level hierarchical logistic regression model to quantify inter-physician variation in imaging use (high-cost imaging: computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance (MR), nuclear medicine; low-cost: plain radiography, ultrasound) in the ED after adjusting for patient-, visit- and physician-level factors. Results: Plain radiography or ultrasound examinations were performed during 36.3% of ED visits; CT, MR, or nuclear medicine examinations were performed during 10.6% of ED visits; 4.1% of ED visits had both high- and low-cost imaging. After adjusting for patient-, visit- and physician-specific factors, only 2.4% and 2.2% of the variation regarding whether or not an ED visit resulted in at least one high-cost and low-cost imaging test, respectively, was attributable to individual physician practice patterns. Physicians who had a tendency to obtain more low-cost imaging also obtained more high-cost imaging, and those who obtained less low-cost imaging also obtained less high-cost imaging. Conclusion: Only a small portion of the variation in imaging use was attributed to differences in ED physician ordering patterns, however, these findings may still help promote discussion among clinicians, and improve imaging utilization.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document