Analysis of questionnaire survey on several issues of vascular ultrasound referring to the formulation of Chinese expert consensuses
10.3969/j.issn.1672-5921.2020.06.004
- Author:
Zhaojun LI
1
Author Information
1. Department of Ultrasound, First People's Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Carotid artery;
Expert consensus;
Questionnaire;
Ultrasound
- From:
Chinese Journal of Cerebrovascular Diseases
2020;17(6):299-307
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To investigate the necessity of several issues of vascular ultrasound referring to the formulation of Chinese expert consensuses for Chinese ultrasound doctors. Methods Ultrasound doctors or related professional doctors in hospitals at all levels over the country were taken as the research object, using the questionnaires survey by WeChat on the mobile phone to investigate and analyze whether expert consensus should be established on several problems of carotid vascular ultrasonography. The questions involved in the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of carotid artery plaques ( Q1 -Q3 ) , the evaluation of ultrasonography for the vulnerable plaques ( Q4 and Q5 ) , the diagnostic criteria of carotid stenosis (Q6-Q8) , and the abnormal development and course of the carotid artery ( Q9 -Q11). The R x C contingency table chi-square test was used to analyze the correlation of Kendall's tau-b classification variables. Results All 3 658 valid questionnaires were collected from various physicians at all levels of hospitals in 34 provinces, municipalities, and autonomous regions. The response rate of the questionnaire has some differences in the regional division, hospital level, and professional title. Among them, the highest responding rates were in east China, at the top three hospitals, and from the attending physicians, with the rates of 43. 44% (1 589/3 658) , 45. 90% ( 1 679/3 658) and 41. 53% (1 519/ 3 658), respectively. The cumulative response rates for the necessary consensus from Ql to Qll were 81.00% (2 963/3 658), 91.94% (3 363/3 658), 85. 24% (3 118/3 658), 96.61% (3 534/3 658), 87.64% (3 206/3 658), 92.62% (3 388/3 658), 86.80% (3 175/3 658), 90.08% (3 295/3 658), 84.53% (3 092/3 658) , 95.02% (3 476/3 658), and 89.99% (3 292/3 658), respectively. Q1, Q2, Q3, Q5, and Q8 were negatively correlated with geographic divisions (r= -0.032, -0.032, -0.030, -0.031, and -0.030, all P <0.05), while Q3, Q7, and Q9, were negatively correlated with occupations (r= -0.030, -0.033, and -0.040, all P< 0.05), Q3, Q8, and Q9, Q10 were negatively correlated with hospital grades (r= -0.039, -0.042, and -0.053, -0.035, all P<0.05). Ql, Q4, Q6, Q7, Q8, and Q10 were negatively correlated with doctors' titles (r = -0.079, -0.032, -0.035, -0.030, -0.030, and -0.052, all P < 0. 05). Conclusions Several problems of carotid artery ultrasound need expert consensus. The urgency of expert consensus is related to the region, hospital level, and doctor title level. Expert consensus is conducive to eliminating the cognitive differences between different levels of ultrasound physicians, unifying standards, standardizing reports, and achieving quality control.
