|
|
||||||||
Evidence-based Radiology Series |
1 From the Department of Radiology, Cork University Hospital, Wilton, Cork, Ireland (M.M.M., P.A.H.); Department of Radiology, Mercy University Hospital, Grenville Place, Cork, Ireland (M.M.M., P.A.H.); Department of Radiology, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland (M.M.M., P.A.H.); and Department of Radiology, Emory University Hospital, Atlanta, Ga (M.K.K.). Received January 4, 2006; revision requested March 2; revision received May 3; final version accepted June 19. Address correspondence to M.M.M. (e-mail: m.maher{at}ucc.ie).
When introducing new interventional radiology techniques or devices, it is important to learn from previous experiences and to remember that there are numerous examples of new techniques that were initially enthusiastically promoted and then subsequently abandoned when early promise was not realized. Appropriateness of new or established interventional radiology techniques to specific clinical conditions must be determined from clinical experience, from communication with experts in the field and/or careful review of available medical literature, and on an individual patient basis by means of review of clinical notes and diagnostic imaging studies. Several paradigms for evidence-based practice (EBP) exist. One model proposes that a central specialized process involving academic centers should primarily construct valid guidelines to direct practice at all levels of medical practice ("top-down" model). An alternative model integrates "the best research evidence with clinical expertise and patient values" ("bottom-up" model). This article will focus on the bottom-up model and describe the use of EBP by individual practitioners or groups of practitioners in optimizing literature review and critical appraisal. EBP is applied to two scenarios as a means of deciding the appropriateness of introducing interventional radiology techniques in a community hospital setting. The authors will also briefly discuss other applications for EBP techniques in interventional radiology, including development of practice guidelines or policy to ensure appropriate and safe practices.
© RSNA, 2007
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
E. J. Heffernan, J. D. Dodd, and D. E. Malone Cardiac Multidetector CT: Technical and Diagnostic Evaluation with Evidence-based Practice Techniques Radiology, August 1, 2008; 248(2): 366 - 377. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. S. Medina and C. C. Blackmore Evidence-based Radiology: Review and Dissemination Radiology, August 1, 2007; 244(2): 331 - 336. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. Hollingworth and J. G. Jarvik Technology Assessment in Radiology: Putting the Evidence in Evidence-based Radiology Radiology, July 1, 2007; 244(1): 31 - 38. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. E. Malone and M. Staunton Evidence-based Practice in Radiology: Step 5 (Evaluate)--Caveats and Common Questions Radiology, May 1, 2007; 243(2): 319 - 328. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| RADIOLOGY | RADIOGRAPHICS | RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE |