Skip to main content
Log in

Überweisungsleitlinien in der bildgebenden Diagnostik

Referral guidelines in diagnostic imaging

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Radiologe Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Dieser Artikel beschreibt die Beweggründe für die Erstellung von Überweisungsrichtlinien für die radiologische Diagnostik. Leitlinien dienen nicht als Direktive, sondern als Konzept für die gute Praxis und als Diskussionsgrundlage für Überweiser und radiologisch tätige Untersucher. Wenngleich noch nicht alle Fragen der effektiven Implementierung gelöst sind, konnte doch nachgewiesen werden, dass Überweisungsrichtlinien dazu geeignet sind, unnötige Röntgenuntersuchungen zu vermeiden und damit einen wichtigen Baustein in einem umfassenden Konzept des Strahlenschutzes darstellen.

Abstract

This article describes the causes and motivations for the introduction of referral guidelines for diagnostic radiology. Guidelines are not intended to serve as directives, but as a concept for good practice and as a basis for discussion and communication between prescribers and practitioners of radiological examinations. Although not all questions about the most effective way of implementation have been solved, it has been shown that referral guidelines serve as a means of avoiding unnecessary x-ray examinations and therefore represent an important tool within a comprehensive concept of radiation protection.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Literatur

  1. Armstrong P, Ringertz H, Bischof-Delaloye A (2001) Leitlinien für die Überweisung zur Durchführung von Bild gebenden Verfahren. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg

  2. Berlin L (2005) Errors of omission. AJR Am J Roentgenol 185: 1416–1421

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Berrington de Gonzalez A, Darby S (2004) Risk of cancer from diagnostic X-rays: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries. Lancet 363: 345–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ (2007) Computed tomography–an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 357: 2277–2284

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Bundesärztekammer (BÄK), (KBV) KB (1997) Beurteilungskriterien für Leitlinien in der medizinischen Versorgung. Dtsch Ärztebl 94: A-2154–A-2155

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dehn T, O’Connell B, Hall R, Moulton T (2000) Appropriateness of imaging examinations: current state and future perspectives. Imaging Economics 13: 18–26

    Google Scholar 

  7. European Commission (1997) Council Directive 97/43/Euratom of 30 June 1997 on health protection of individuals against the dangers of ionizing radiation in relation to medical exposure, and repealing directive 84/466/Euratom. In: Official journal NO. L 180, 09/07/1997. pp P. 0022–0027

  8. Fassbender WJ, Stumpf UC (2006) DVO-Leitlinie 2006. Was hat sich geändert in der Diagnostik, Prävention und Therapie der Osteoporose? Z Rheumatol 65: 364–366, 368–369

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Frühwald F, Imhof H, Kletter K (2006) Orientierungshilfe Radiologie. Anleitung zum optimalen Einsatz der klinischen Radiologie. Verlag der Österreichischen Ärztekammer, Wien

  10. Greeson TW, Zimmerman HM (2007) The beginning of the end of self-referral? AJR Am J Roentgenol 189: 513–516

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Grimshaw J, Russell I (1993) Effect of clinical guidelines on medical practice: a systematic review of rigorous evaluations. Lancet 342: 1317–1322

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Gunderman RB, Bettmann M, Davis LP (2007) Promoting educational innovation: lessons from the request for proposals for ACR Appropriateness Criteria Usage in Medical Education. J Am Coll Radiol 4: 919–924

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Harding LK (1997) Radiation protection – lessons from the past. Br J Radiol 70 Spec No: S10–S16

    Google Scholar 

  14. International Commission on Radiological Protection (1991) ICRP Publication 60: 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection

  15. Juluru K, Eng J (2005) Internet-based radiology order-entry, reporting, and workflow management system for coordinating urgent study requests during off-hours. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184: 1017–1020

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kainberger F, Czembirek H, Frühwald F et al. (2005) Multimodale Implementierung radiologischer Leitlinien. In: Reiners C (Hrsg) Tagungsband der Gemeinsamen Jahrestagung deutschsprachiger Strahlenschutzverbände Medizinischer Strahlenschutz – Konzepte, Umsetzung, Neue Verfahren in Diagnostik und Therapie. Urban & Fischer, Jena, S 78–88

  17. Kainberger F, Czembirek H, Frühwald F et al. (2002) Guidelines and algorithms – strategies for standardization of referral criteria in diagnostic radiology. Eur Radiol 12: 673–679

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kielar AZ, El-Maraghi RH, Carlos RC (2007) Health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness analysis in radiology. Acad Radiol 14: 411–419

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Leinsinger G, Hahn K (2001) Indikationen zur bildgebenden Diagnostik. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

  20. Loose R, Stöver B, Müller W-U (2006) Orientierungshilfe für radiologische und nuklearmedizinische Untersuchungen. Empfehlung der Strahlenschutzkommission. Hoffmann-Fachverlag, Berlin

  21. Mackenzie R, Dixon AK (1995) Measuring the effects of imaging: an evaluative framework. Clin Radiol 50: 513–518

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Malone DE (2007) Evidence-based practice in radiology: an introduction to the series. Radiology 242: 12–14

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mankad K, Bull M (2005) Awareness of „making the best use of a department of clinical radiology“ amongst physicians. Clin Radiol 60: 618; author reply 618–619

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. McNeil BJ, Abrams HL (1986) Brigham and Women’s Hospital Handbook of Diagnostic Imaging. Little, Brown, Boston Toronto

  25. party RCoRW (1993) Influence of Royal College of Radiologists‘ guidelines on referral from general practice. Royal College of Radiologists Working Party. BMJ 306: 110–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Praschinger A, Stieger S, Kainberger F (2007) Diagnostic grand rounds in undergraduate medical education. Med Educ 41: 1107–1108

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Regulla DF, Eder H (2005) Patient exposure in medical X-ray imaging in Europe. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 114: 11–25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Rosenthal DI, Weilburg JB, Schultz T et al. (2006) Radiology order entry with decision support: initial clinical experience. J Am Coll Radiol 3: 799–806

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Royal College of Radiologists Working party (2006) Making the best use of clinical radiology services. The Royal College of Radiologists, London

  30. Sistrom CL (2005) The ACR appropriateness criteria: translation to practice and research. J Am Coll Radiol 2: 61–67

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Strife JL, Gary LE, Becker J et al. (2007) The American Board of Radiology perspective on maintenance of certification: part IV – practice quality improvement in diagnostic radiology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188: 1183–1186

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Triantopoulou C, Tsalafoutas I, Maniatis P et al. (2005) Analysis of radiological examination request forms in conjunction with justification of X-ray exposures. Eur J Radiol 53: 306–311

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. Pärtan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pärtan, G., Kainberger, F. & Frühwald, F. Überweisungsleitlinien in der bildgebenden Diagnostik. Radiologe 48, 268–271 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00117-008-1618-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00117-008-1618-9

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation