R. Madhok et al., BONE DENSITOMETRY AT A DISTRICT GENERAL-HOSPITAL - EVALUATION OF SERVICE BY DOCTORS AND PATIENTS, Quality in health care, 5(1), 1996, pp. 36-43
Objective-To assess doctors' and patients' views about a district gene
ral hospital bone densitometry service and to examine existing practic
e to influence future provision. Design-Three postal surveys: (a) of d
octors potentially using the service, (b) of patients undergoing a bon
e densitometry rest during a six month period, and (c) of the referrin
g doctors of the patients undergoing the test. Setting-Bone densitomet
ry service at South Cleveland Hospital, Middlesbrough and two district
health authorities: South Tees and Northallerton. Subjects-All genera
l practitioners (n = 201) and hospital consultants in general medicine
, rheumatology, obstetrics and gynaecoloqy, orthopaedics, radiotherapy
and oncology, haematology, and radiology (n = 61); all patients under
going an initial bone densitometry test (n = 309) during a sir: month
period; and their referring doctors. Main measures-Service awareness a
nd 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 ser
vice among doctors and patients; 219(84%) doctors were aware and 155 o
f 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 s
creening although the general use was consistent with current guidelin
es. Two hundred (65%) bone densitometry measurements were normal, 71(2
3%) were low normal, and 38(12%) were low. Although doctors reported t
hat management of patients had been influenced by the test results, th
e algorithm for decision making was unclear, Patients and doctors were
satisfied with the service and most (n = 146, 68%) doctors wanted ref
erral guidelines for the service, Conclusions-There was a high awarene
ss 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 justif
ied, many tests were normal, and clinical decision making was not alwa
ys influenced by the test result. It is concluded that bone densitomet
ry services should be provided but only for patients whose management
will be influenced by test results and subject to guidelines to ensure
appropariate use of the technology.