A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Use of a full-body digital X-ray imaging system in acute medical emergencies: a systematic review. | LitMetric

Use of a full-body digital X-ray imaging system in acute medical emergencies: a systematic review.

Emerg Med J

Department of Emergency Medicine, Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine & Institute of Emergency Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.

Published: February 2016

Background: To evaluate the available evidence for the clinical effectiveness and biohazard safety of a full-body digital X-ray imaging system (Lodox) in acute medical emergencies.

Methods: Electronic databases (including PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library; up to January 2014) and reference lists of articles were searched. The quality of the included studies was determined, and a narrative assessment was undertaken.

Results: A total of 256 articles were reviewed. Fifteen clinical studies and eight case series met the eligibility criteria. All 23 studies reporting use of a full-body X-ray imaging system in acute medical emergencies on Lodox. Based on figures in six studies comprising various evaluation methods, image quality of Lodox was mostly comparable to that of conventional X-rays and the radiation dose was considerably lower. Lodox demonstrated a sensitivity ranging from 62% to 73%, and a specificity ranging from 99% to 100% compared with CT for the evaluation of emergency patients with polytrauma, which is similar to that of conventional X-rays. Examination time using Lodox ranged from 3.5  to 13.9 min compared with 8 to 25.7 min using conventional X-rays. However, there was no evidence it significantly shortened resuscitation time or emergency department length of stay. Publication bias might have occurred; some published studies might have been influenced by conflicts of interest.

Conclusions: The Lodox machine is capable of rapidly scanning the entire body and offers an equivalent diagnostic assessment tool compared with conventional X-rays. It seems to have the potential to reduce cumulative radiation dosage for emergency patients compared with conventional X-rays. Application of Lodox might be helpful to reduce resource use and simplify care in lower-resourced areas.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2014-204270DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

conventional x-rays
20
x-ray imaging
12
imaging system
12
acute medical
12
full-body digital
8
digital x-ray
8
system acute
8
medical emergencies
8
emergency patients
8
compared conventional
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!