New Diagnostic Tests: Breakthrough Approaches or Expensive Add-ons?

Editorials2 December 2003New Diagnostic Tests: Breakthrough Approaches or Expensive Add-ons?Richard A. Deyo, MD, MPH and Jeffrey J. Jarvik, MD, MPHRichard A. Deyo, MD, MPHFrom University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98103.Search for more papers by this author and Jeffrey J. Jarvik, MD, MPHFrom University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98103.Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-139-11-200312020-00014 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail New diagnostic tests are seductive for physicians and patients alike. More information can only be better. Many tests are noninvasive, and it seems that no harm can come from them. With insurance, costs seem secondary. The growth of direct-to-consumer sales of imaging procedures attests to the allure of diagnostic testing in the public mind. Physicians and hospitals often find new diagnostic technologies attractive because of expected financial return.And yet, no test is perfect. False-positive and false-negative results can lead to additional testing, unnecessary treatments, and avoidable complications. Sometimes, diagnostic test results have little effect on treatment and even less ...References1. Fineberg HV, Bauman R, Sosman M. Computerized cranial tomography. Effect on diagnostic and therapeutic plans. JAMA. 1977;238:224-7. [PMID: 406427] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar2. Fryback DG, Thornbury JR. The efficacy of diagnostic imaging. Med Decis Making. 1991;11:88-94. [PMID: 1907710] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3. Gould MK, Kuschner WG, Rydzak CE, Maclean CC, Demas AN, Shigemitsu H, . Test performance of positron emission tomography and computed tomography for mediastinal staging in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. A meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2003;139:879-92. LinkGoogle Scholar4. Mulherin SA, Miller WC. Spectrum bias or spectrum effect? Subgroup variation in diagnostic test evaluation. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:598-602. [PMID: 12353947] LinkGoogle Scholar5. Ransohoff DF, Feinstein AR. Problems of spectrum and bias in evaluating the efficacy of diagnostic tests. N Engl J Med. 1978;299:926-30. [PMID: 692598] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar6. Scott WJ, Shepherd J, Gambhir SS. Cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET for staging non-small cell lung cancer: a decision analysis. Ann Thorac Surg. 1998; 66:1876-83; discussion 1883-5. [PMID: 9930463] Google Scholar7. Dietlein M, Weber K, Gandjour A, Moka D, Theissen P, Lauterbach KW, . Cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET for the management of potentially operable non-small cell lung cancer: priority for a PET-based strategy after nodal-negative CT results. Eur J Nucl Med. 2000;27:1598-609. [PMID: 11105815] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar8. Katzan IL, Furlan AJ, Lloyd LE, Frank JI, Harper DL, Hinchey JA, . Use of tissue-type plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke: the Cleveland area experience. JAMA. 2000;283:1151-8. [PMID: 10703777] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar9. Mountain CF. Revisions in the International System for Staging Lung Cancer. Chest. 1997;111:1710-7. [PMID: 9187198] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar10. Guyatt GH, Tugwell PX, Feeny DH, Haynes RB, Drummond M. A framework for clinical evaluation of diagnostic technologies. CMAJ. 1986;134:587-94. [PMID: 3512062] MedlineGoogle Scholar11. Hull RD, Hirsh J, Carter CJ, Jay RM, Ockelford PA, Buller HR, . Diagnostic efficacy of impedance plethysmography for clinically suspected deep-vein thrombosis. A randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 1985;102:21-8. [PMID: 3881068] LinkGoogle Scholar12. Jarvik JG, Hollingworth W, Martin B, Emerson SS, Gray DT, Overman S, . Rapid magnetic resonance imaging vs radiographs for patients with low back pain: a randomized, controlled trial. JAMA. 2003;289:2810-8. [PMID: 12783911] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAuthors: Richard A. Deyo, MD, MPH; Jeffrey J. Jarvik, MD, MPHAffiliations: From University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98103.Disclosures: None disclosed.Corresponding Author: Richard A. Deyo, MD, MPH, Center for Cost and Outcomes Research, 146 North Canal Street, Suite 300, Seattle, WA 98103.Current Author Addresses: Drs. Deyo and Jarvik: Center for Cost and Outcomes Research, 146 North Canal Street, Suite 300, Seattle, WA 98103. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoTest Performance of Positron Emission Tomography and Computed Tomography for Mediastinal Staging in Patients with Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Michael K. Gould , Ware G. Kuschner , Chara E. Rydzak , Courtney C. Maclean , Anita N. Demas , Hidenobu Shigemitsu , Jo Kay Chan , and Douglas K. Owens Metrics Cited byRapid and sensitive colorimetric detection of pathogens based on silver–urease interactionsDeconstructing Chronic Low Back Pain in Older Adults: Summary RecommendationsShared Decision Making to Improve the Emergency Care of Older Adults: A Research AgendaEfectividad clínica de un programa de fisioterapia multimodal complementado con carrera acuática de alta intensidad sobre la lumbalgia. Un estudio con evaluación previa en el postestMulti-Modality Mediastinal Staging for Lung Cancer Among Medicare BeneficiariesEvidence-based diagnosisDiagnostic strategy for growth hormone deficiency: relevance of IGF-1 determination as a screening testThe utility of B-type natriuretic peptide in the diagnosis of heart failure in the emergency department: a systematic reviewJoint National Cancer Institute-Food and Drug Administration Workshop on Research Strategies, Study Designs, and Statistical Approaches to Biomarker Validation for Cancer Diagnosis and DetectionLow Back Pain in Older Adults: Are We Utilizing Healthcare Resources Wisely?Imaging of the Patient with Non–Small Cell Lung CancerUse of a transgenic mouse model to identify markers of human lung tumorsClinical Decisions Associated With Positron Emission Tomography in a Prospective Cohort of Patients With Suspected or Known Cancer at One United States CenterRules of evidence for cancer molecular-marker discovery and validationRegulatory Issues in the Co-Development of Oncology Drugs and Proteomic Tests: An Overview 2 December 2003Volume 139, Issue 11Page: 950-951KeywordsBiopsyComputed axial tomographyLung and intrathoracic tumorsLymph nodesPositron emission tomographyRandomized trialsRespiratory system proceduresSpecificitySurgeryThoracotomy ePublished: 2 December 2003 Issue Published: 2 December 2003 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2003 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...