Literature DB >> 15791768

Failure to recognize and act on abnormal test results: the case of screening bone densitometry.

Peter Cram1, Gary E Rosenthal, Robert Ohsfeldt, Robert B Wallace, Janet Schlechte, Gordon D Schiff.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Failure to follow up on abnormal test results is common. A model was developed to capture the reasons why providers did not take action on abnormal test results.
METHODS: A systematic review of the medical literature was conducted to identify why providers did not follow up on test results. The reasons were then synthesized to develop an operational model. The model was tested by reviewing electronic medical records of consecutive patients diagnosed with osteoporosis through a dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan to determine whether: (1) the scan results had been reeviewed; (2) therapy was recommended; (3) the scan results were not reviewed and why this occurred.
RESULTS: Of the 48 newly diagnosed osteoporosis patients, 16 did not receive a recommendation to begin treatment. There was no evidence that the scan results wrere reviewed in 11 of the 16 cases (23% of all abnormal scans); the scan results of an additional 5 patients were reviewed but no treatment was recommended. DISCUSSION AND
CONCLUSIONS: A clinically significant ercentage of DXA scan results went unrecognized. As a long-term solution, direct patient notification could theoretically reduce the burden on providers, activate and empower patients, and create a back-up system for ensuring that patients are notified of their test results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15791768     DOI: 10.1016/s1553-7250(05)31013-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf        ISSN: 1553-7250


  24 in total

1.  Understanding Preferences for Osteoporosis Information to Develop an Osteoporosis Patient Education Brochure.

Authors:  Stephanie W Edmonds; Samantha L Solimeo; Vu-Thuy Nguyen; Nicole C Wright; Douglas W Roblin; Kenneth G Saag; Peter Cram
Journal:  Perm J       Date:  2016-11-18

2.  Unintended errors with EHR-based result management: a case series.

Authors:  Thomas R Yackel; Peter J Embi
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2010 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.497

3.  Clinician Perspectives on the Management of Abnormal Subcritical Tests in an Urban Academic Safety-Net Health Care System.

Authors:  Cassidy Clarity; Urmimala Sarkar; Jonathan Lee; Margaret A Handley; L Elizabeth Goldman
Journal:  Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf       Date:  2017-09-06

4.  Direct reporting of laboratory test results to patients by mail to enhance patient safety.

Authors:  Sharon Sung; Valerie Forman-Hoffman; Mark C Wilson; Peter Cram
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2006-07-07       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 5.  Failure to follow-up test results for ambulatory patients: a systematic review.

Authors:  Joanne L Callen; Johanna I Westbrook; Andrew Georgiou; Julie Li
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2011-12-20       Impact factor: 5.128

6.  Incidence and predictors of microbiology results returning postdischarge and requiring follow-up.

Authors:  Robert El-Kareh; Christopher Roy; Gregor Brodsky; Molly Perencevich; Eric G Poon
Journal:  J Hosp Med       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 2.960

7.  Activating Patients With a Tailored Bone Density Test Results Letter and Educational Brochure: the PAADRN Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Fredric D Wolinsky; Yiyue Lou; Stephanie W Edmonds; Sylvie F Hall; Michael P Jones; Nicole C Wright; Kenneth G Saag; Peter Cram; Douglas W Roblin
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2016-09-16       Impact factor: 2.617

8.  Timely follow-up of abnormal diagnostic imaging test results in an outpatient setting: are electronic medical records achieving their potential?

Authors:  Hardeep Singh; Eric J Thomas; Shrinidi Mani; Dean Sittig; Harvinder Arora; Donna Espadas; Myrna M Khan; Laura A Petersen
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2009-09-28

9.  Patient-activation and guideline-concordant pharmacological treatment after bone density testing: the PAADRN randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  P Cram; F D Wolinsky; Y Lou; S W Edmonds; S F Hall; D W Roblin; N C Wright; M P Jones; K G Saag
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2016-06-30       Impact factor: 4.507

10.  Patient- and system-related barriers for the earlier diagnosis of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Terry L Wahls; Ika Peleg
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2009-09-15       Impact factor: 2.497

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.