Stroke Imaging: Quantity, But is There Quality?
D. Levine,J. Burke
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000000538
2016-05-01
Medical Care
Abstract:D iagnostic tests are a routine part of clinical care, accounting for a considerable amount of clinical effort and costs. We commonly assess the quality of medical care by examining these processes of care rather than their outcomes. However, the evidence base for “good” medical care, even guideline-recommended care, is often less strong than we realize. This is particularly true for diagnostic tests that only influence outcomes indirectly by changing decision making and management. Thus, in routine clinical practice, fundamental questions go unasked or unanswered: Why do we test? Who should we test? These questions, although not unasked, are largely unanswered for most diagnostic tests for stroke. Every year, millions of individuals worldwide suffer a stroke, 80%–87% of which are ischemic. Clinical practice guidelines recommend several imaging tests for suspected or confirmed stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA) including recommendations on axial brain imaging [eg, computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)], vascular (intracranial and cervical) imaging, and echocardiography. However, these recommendations are based on modest and varying levels of evidence and expert opinion. Formal technology assessments of many recommended diagnostic tests for stroke are lacking. The article by Ng et al prompts us to reexamine the value of diagnostic tests for stroke. The investigators evaluated temporal trends in the use of selected diagnostic tests for ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke as well as TIA among 42,378 patients (median age, 73 y) discharged alive from 11 regional stroke centers between 2003 and 2012 in a province of Canada, a country with universal health care. Information from a stroke registry was linked to longitudinal, administrative data on diagnostic tests after discharge, readmissions, and surgical procedures. The study population included patients with ischemic stroke (54%), TIA (27%), and hemorrhagic stroke (19%). Trained neurology research nurses verified stroke diagnoses and type using chart abstraction and criteria. The frequency of all diagnostic tests increased over time. In the combined ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke population, the frequency of any brain imaging (CT or MRI) increased from 96% in 2003 to 99% in 2012. In the subgroup with ischemic stroke/TIA, cervical vessel imaging increased from 62% to 88% and echocardiography from 52% to 70%. Increases in evidence-based treatments in patients with ischemic stroke/TIA were less uniform: antithrombotic therapy increased from 83% to 91%, but the frequency of anticoagulation (68%) and carotid revascularization (1.5%) did not. The study has several strengths. The longitudinal study has information on diagnostic testing as well as downstream surgical procedures and medication use because it combines registry and administrative data. The identification of strokes and inpatient diagnostic testing by chart abstraction is an additional strength compared with the common use of billing data in other studies. The number of cases was large.