Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 1996 Mar;5(1):36-43.
doi: 10.1136/qshc.5.1.36.

Bone densitometry at a district general hospital: evaluation of service by doctors and patients

Affiliations

Bone densitometry at a district general hospital: evaluation of service by doctors and patients

R Madhok et al. Qual Health Care. 1996 Mar.

Abstract

Objective: To assess doctors' and patients' views about a district general hospital bone densitometry service and to examine existing practice to influence future provision.

Design: Three postal surveys: (a) of doctors potentially using the service, (b) of patients undergoing a bone densitometry test during a six month period, and (c) of the referring doctors of the patients undergoing the test.

Setting: Bone densitometry service at South Cleveland Hospital, Middlesbrough and two district health authorities: South Tees and Northallerton.

Subjects: All general practitioners (n=201) and hospital consultants in general medicine, rheumatology, obstetrics and gynaecology, orthopaedics, radio therapy and oncology, haematology, and radiology (n=61); all patients undergoing an initial bone densitometry test (n=309) during a six month period; and their referring doctors.

Main measures: Service awareness and use, knowledge of clinical indications, test results, influence of test results on patient management, satisfaction with the service and its future provision.

Results: The overall response rates for the three surveys were 87%, 70%, and 61%. There was a high awareness of the service among doctors and patients; 219(84%) doctors were aware and 155 of them (71%) had used it, and patients often (40%) suggested the test to their doctor. The test was used for a range of reasons including screening although the general use was consistent with current guidelines. Two hundred (65%) bone densitometry measurements were normal, 71(23%) were low normal, and 38(12%) were low. Although doctors reported that management of patients had been influenced by the test results, the algorithm for decision making was unclear. Patients and doctors were satisfied with the service and most (n=146, 68%) doctors wanted referral guidelines for the service.

Conclusions: There was a high awareness of, use of, and satisfaction with the service. Patients were being referred for a range of reasons and a few of these could not be justified, many tests were normal, and clinical decision making was not always influenced by the test result. It is concluded that bone densitometry services should be provided but only for patients whose management will be influenced by test results and subject to guidelines to ensure appropriate use of the technology.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. JAMA. 1990 Feb 2;263(5):665-8 - PubMed
    1. Ann Intern Med. 1990 Jul 15;113(2):95-103 - PubMed
    1. N Engl J Med. 1991 Apr 18;324(16):1105-9 - PubMed
    1. Lancet. 1992 Oct 31;340(8827):1103-4 - PubMed
    1. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1985 Dec 1;153(7):745-51 - PubMed