Dataset Information

Laboratory test ordering and results management systems: a qualitative study of safety risks identified by administrators in general practice.

ABSTRACT: To explore experiences and perceptions of frontline administrators involved in the systems-based management of laboratory test ordering and results handling in general medical practice.Qualitative using focus group interviews.West of Scotland general medical practices in three National Health Service (NHS) territorial board areas.Convenience samples of administrators (receptionists, healthcare assistants and phlebotomists).Transcript data were subjected to content analysis.A total of 40 administrative staff were recruited. Four key themes emerged: (1) system variations and weaknesses (eg, lack of a tracking process is a known risk that needs to be addressed). (2) Doctor to administrator communication (eg, unclear information can lead to emotional impacts and additional workload). (3) Informing patients of test results (eg, levels of anxiety and uncertainty are experienced by administrators influenced by experience and test result outcome) and (4) patient follow-up and confidentiality (eg, maintaining confidentiality in a busy reception area can be challenging). The key findings were explained in terms of sociotechnical systems theory.The study further confirms the safety-related problems associated with results handling systems and adds to our knowledge of the communication and psychosocial issues that can affect the health and well-being of staff and patients alike. However, opportunities exist for practices to identify barriers to safe care, and plan and implement system improvements to accommodate or mitigate the potential for human error in this complex area.

SUBMITTER: Bowie P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3918986 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Laboratory test ordering and results management systems: a qualitative study of safety risks identified by administrators in general practice.

Bowie Paul P Halley Lyn L McKay John J

BMJ open 20140206 2

<h4>Objective</h4>To explore experiences and perceptions of frontline administrators involved in the systems-based management of laboratory test ordering and results handling in general medical practice.<h4>Design</h4>Qualitative using focus group interviews.<h4>Setting</h4>West of Scotland general medical practices in three National Health Service (NHS) territorial board areas.<h4>Participants</h4>Convenience samples of administrators (receptionists, healthcare assistants and phlebotomists).<h4 ...[more]

PMID: 24503302

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRedundant use of diagnostic tests in primary care has shown to be a contributor to rising Dutch healthcare costs. A price display in the test ordering system of the electronic health records (EHRs) could potentially be a low-cost and easy to implement intervention to a decrease in test ordering rate in the primary care setting by creating more cost-awareness among general practitioners (GPs). The aim of this study was to assess the effect of a price display for diagnostic laboratory tests in the EHR on laboratory test ordering behavior of GPs in the Westelijke Mijnstreek region in the Netherlands.MethodsA pre-post intervention study among 154 GPs working in 57 general practices was conducted from September 2019, until March 2020, in the Netherlands. The intervention consisted of displaying the costs of 22 laboratory tests at the time of ordering. The primary outcome was the mean test ordering rate per 1.000 patients per month, per general practice.ResultsTest ordering rates were on average rising prior to the intervention. The total mean monthly test order volume showed a non-statistically significant interruption in this rising trend after the intervention, with the mean monthly test ordering rate levelling out from 322.4 to 322.2 (P = 0.86). A subgroup analysis for solely individually priced tests showed a statistically significant decrease in mean monthly test ordering rate after implementation of the price display for the sum of all tests from 67.2 to 63.3 (P = 0.01), as well as for some of these tests individually (i.e. thrombocytes, ALAT, TSH, folic acid). Leucocytes, ESR, vitamin B12, anti-CCP and NT-proBNP also showed a decrease, albeit not statistically significant (P > 0.05).ConclusionsOur study suggests that a price display intervention is a simple tool that can alter physicians order behavior and constrain the expanding use of laboratory tests. Future research might consider alternative study designs and a longer follow-up period. Furthermore, in future studies, the combination with a multitude of interventions, like educational programs and feedback strategies, should be studied, while potentially adverse events caused by reduced testing should also be taken into consideration.

Project description:BackgroundStudies have revealed inappropriate laboratory testing as a source of waste. This review aimed at evaluating the effects and features of CDSSs on physicians' appropriate laboratory test ordering in inpatient hospitals.MethodMedline through PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Cochrane were queried without any time period restriction. Studies using CDSSs as an intervention to improve laboratory test ordering as the primary aim were included. The study populations in the included studies were laboratory tests, physicians ordering laboratory tests, or the patients for whom laboratory tests were ordered. The included papers were evaluated for their outcomes related to the effect of CDSSs which were categorized based on the outcomes related to tests, physician, and patients. The primary outcome measures were the number and cost of the ordered laboratory tests. The instrument from The National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (NIH) was used to assess the quality of the included studies. Moreover, we applied a checklist for assessing the quality and features of the CDSSs presented in the included studies. A narrative synthesis was used to describe and compare the designs and the results of included studies.ResultSixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies were conducted based on a quasi-experimental design. The results showed improvement in laboratory test-related outcomes (e.g. proportion and cost of tests) and also physician-related outcomes (e.g. guideline adherence and orders cancellation). Patient-related outcomes (e.g. length of stay and mortality rate) were not well investigated in the included studies. In addition, the evidence about applying CDSS as a decision aid for interpreting laboratory results was rare.ConclusionCDSSs increase appropriate test ordering in hospitals through eliminating redundant test orders and enhancing evidence-based practice. Appropriate testing and cost saving were both affected by the CDSSs. However, the evidence is limited about the effects of laboratory test CDSSs on patient-related outcomes.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To characterise the test ordering pattern in Northern Portugal and to investigate the influence of context-related factors, analysing the test ordered at the level of geographical groups of family physicians and at the level of different healthcare organisations. DESIGN:Cross-sectional study. SETTING:Northern Primary Health Care, Portugal. PARTICIPANTS:Records about diagnostic and laboratory tests ordered from 2035 family physicians working at the Northern Regional Health Administration, who served approximately 3.5?million Portuguese patients, in 2014. OUTCOMES:To determine the 20 most ordered diagnostic and laboratory tests in the Northern Regional Health Administration; to identify the presence and extent of variations in the 20 most ordered diagnostic and laboratory tests between the Groups of Primary Care Centres and between health units; and to study factors that may explain these variations. RESULTS:The 20 most ordered diagnostic and laboratory tests almost entirely comprise laboratory tests and account for 70.9% of the total tests requested. We can trace a major pattern of test ordering for haemogram, glucose, lipid profile, creatinine and urinalysis. There was a significant difference (P<0.001) in test orders for all tests between Groups of Primary Care Centres and for all tests, except glycated haemoglobin (P=0.06), between health units. Generally, the Personalised Healthcare Units ordered more than Family Health Units. CONCLUSIONS:The results from this study show that the most commonly ordered tests in Portugal are laboratory tests, that there is a tendency for overtesting and that there is a large variability in diagnostic and laboratory test ordering in different geographical and organisational Portuguese primary care practices, suggesting that there may be considerable potential for the rationalisation of test ordering. The existence of Family Health Units seems to be a strong determinant in decreasing test ordering by Portuguese family physicians. Approaches to ensuring more rational testing are needed.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Social comparison feedback is an increasingly popular strategy that uses performance report cards to modify physician behavior. Our objective was to test the effect of such feedback on the ordering of routine laboratory tests for hospitalized patients, a practice considered overused. METHODS:This was a single-blinded randomized controlled trial. Between January and June 2016, physicians on six general medicine teams at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania were cluster randomized with equal allocation to two arms: (1) those e-mailed a summary of their routine laboratory test ordering vs. the service average for the prior week, linked to a continuously updated personalized dashboard containing patient-level details, and snapshot of the dashboard and (2) those who did not receive the intervention. The primary outcome was the count of routine laboratory test orders placed by a physician per patient-day. We modeled the count of orders by each physician per patient-day after the intervention as a function of trial arm and the physician's order count before the intervention. The count outcome was modeled using negative binomial models with adjustment for clustering within teams. RESULTS:One hundred and fourteen interns and residents participated. We did not observe a statistically significant difference in adjusted reduction in routine laboratory ordering between the intervention and control physicians (physicians in the intervention group ordered 0.14 fewer tests per patient-day than physicians in the control group, 95% CI -?0.56 to 0.27, p?=?0.50). Physicians whose absolute ordering rate deviated from the peer rate by more than 1.0 laboratory test per patient-day reduced their laboratory ordering by 0.80 orders per patient-day (95% CI -?1.58 to -?0.02, p?=?0.04). CONCLUSIONS:Personalized social comparison feedback on routine laboratory ordering did not change targeted behavior among physicians, although there was a significant decrease in orders among participants who deviated more from the peer rate. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Clinicaltrials.gov registration: #NCT02330289.

Project description:BackgroundLaboratory tests and transfusions are sometimes ordered inappropriately, particularly in the critical care setting, which sees frequent use of both. Audit and Feedback (A&F) is a potentially useful intervention for modifying healthcare provider behaviors, but its application to the complex, team-based environment of critical care is not well understood. We conducted a systematic review of the literature on A&F interventions for improving test or transfusion ordering in the critical care setting.MethodsFive databases, two registries, and the bibliographies of relevant articles were searched. We included critical care studies that assessed the use of A&F targeting healthcare provider behaviors, alone or in combination with other interventions to improve test and transfusion ordering, as compared to historical practice, no intervention, or another healthcare behaviour change intervention. Studies were included only if they reported laboratory test or transfusion orders, or the appropriateness of orders, as outcomes. There were no restrictions based on study design, date of publication, or follow-up time. Intervention characteristics and absolute differences in outcomes were summarized. The quality of individual studies was assessed using a modified version of the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Cochrane Review Group's criteria.ResultsWe identified 16 studies, including 13 uncontrolled before-after studies, one randomized controlled trial, one controlled before-after study, and one controlled clinical trial (quasi-experimental). These studies described 17 interventions, mostly (88%) multifaceted interventions with an A&F component. Feedback was most often provided in a written format only (41%), more than once (53%), and most often only provided data aggregated to the group-level (41%). Most studies saw a change in the hypothesized direction, but not all studies provided statistical analyses to formally test improvement. Overall study quality was low, with studies often lacking a concurrent control group.ConclusionsOur review summarizes characteristics of A&F interventions implemented in the critical care context, points to some mechanisms by which A&F might be made more effective in this setting, and provides an overview of how the appropriateness of orders was reported. Our findings suggest that A&F can be effective in the context of critical care; however, further research is required to characterize approaches that optimize the effectiveness in this setting alongside more rigorous evaluation methods.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42016051941.

Dataset Information

Laboratory test ordering and results management systems: a qualitative study of safety risks identified by administrators in general practice.

Publications

Laboratory test ordering and results management systems: a qualitative study of safety risks identified by administrators in general practice.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets