Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wordsworth, S.
Right arrow Articles by Scott, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wordsworth, S.
Right arrow Articles by Scott, A.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of Public Health Medicine 24:88-94 (2002)
© 2002 Faculty of Public Health Medicine of the Royal Colleges of Physicians of the United Kingdom

Ultrasound scanning by general practitioners: is it worthwhile?


Sarah Wordsworth
Anthony Scott

Health Economics Research Unit, Department of Public Health, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill AB25 2ZD


Address correspondence to S. Wordsworth. E-mail: s.wordsworth{at}aberdeen. ac.uk

Background There are several alternatives for providing ultrasound scanning, besides traditional hospital-based services. One such alternative is for general practitioners (GPs) to perform scanning in the community. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of GP ultrasound scanning on the use of National Health Service (NHS) resources in the United Kingdom (UK), and elicit patients' preferences for having an ultrasound scan.

Methods A cost analysis and an assessment of quality of GP scans, based on a clinical audit and a postal survey of patients' preferences, were carried out. The setting was a rural general practice and urban teaching hospital in the Grampian region of Scotland. The analysis of costs and assessment of the quality of GP scans were based on 131 patients scanned at the practice in a 6 month clinical audit period. The survey of patients' preferences was undertaken on a random sample of 500 patients from the GPs' list and 250 consecutive patients scanned at the practice.

Results The assessment of the management of patients during audit revealed that the scanner at the practice reduced the number of hospital scans, number of out-patient and in-patient visits, and emergency admissions. The unit cost of a scan was higher in the practice than at the hospital. However, when all the costs for a scanning episode were considered, the total and average costs were lower in the practice because of the avoidance of hospital visits. The results showed that the quality of GP scanning, subject to further training, was considered to be sufficient to continue scanning at the practice. Patients preferred to be scanned at the practice, and were prepared to wait up to an extra 5 days, and accept a reduction in the accuracy of scanning of up to 3.5 per cent for their choice. Who carried out the scan was not important to patients.

Conclusion Although the results of the study provide some evidence to support GP scanning in this setting, further research on diagnostic accuracy and alternative models of care need to be conducted.

Keywords: GP ultrasound scanning, quality, costs, patient, preferences


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Emerg. Med. J.Home page
A Lindelius, S Torngren, H Pettersson, and J Adami
Role of surgeon-performed ultrasound on further management of patients with acute abdominal pain: a randomised controlled clinical trial
Emerg. Med. J., August 1, 2009; 26(8): 561 - 566.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.