Literature DB >> 28275627

Inappropriateness in laboratory medicine: an elephant in the room?

Giuseppe Lippi1, Chiara Bovo2, Marcello Ciaccio3.   

Abstract

Appropriateness of diagnostic testing can be conventionally described as prescription of the right test, using the right method, at the right time, to the right patient, with the right costs and for producing the right outcome. There is ongoing debate about the real burden of inappropriateness in laboratory diagnostics. The media coverage of this issue has also recently led to either over- or under-emphasizing the clinical, organizational and economic consequences. This is quite problematic, inasmuch as some reliable data are available in the current scientific literature, showing that inappropriateness of laboratory testing can be as high as 70%. This is especially evident for, though not limited to, cancer biomarkers testing, in which the practice of avoidable tests ordering is dramatically magnified. The reasons beyond inappropriateness are many and multifaceted, entailing wrong habits, resistance to changes, poor culture, insufficient education and healthcare inefficiencies. There are many unfavorable consequences attributable to avoidable testing, including unjustified incremental costs, derangement of laboratory efficiency and potential patient safety issues. The tentative solutions to this important problem necessitate that policymakers, local hospital administrators, laboratory professionals, clinicians, patients' associations and diagnostic companies join the efforts and embark in the same landmark effort for disseminating a better culture of appropriateness.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Appropriateness; inappropriateness; laboratory medicine; laboratory testing; quality

Year:  2017        PMID: 28275627      PMCID: PMC5337217          DOI: 10.21037/atm.2017.02.04

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Transl Med        ISSN: 2305-5839


  18 in total

1.  Tumour markers in internal medicine: a low-cost test or an unnecessary expense? A retrospective study based on appropriateness.

Authors:  D Arioli; M Pipino; E Boldrini; E Amateis; A Cristani; P Ventura; E Romagnoli; M C De Santis; M L Zeneroli
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2007-07-09       Impact factor: 3.397

2.  Appropriateness of theophylline plasma levels.

Authors:  Giuseppe Lippi; Gian Luca Salvagno; Giorgio Brocco; Gian Cesare Guidi
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 5.534

3.  Sustained reductions in emergency department laboratory test orders: impact of a simple intervention.

Authors:  Kevin H Chu; Amol S Wagholikar; Jaimi H Greenslade; John A O'Dwyer; Anthony F Brown
Journal:  Postgrad Med J       Date:  2013-06-04       Impact factor: 2.401

4.  Closing the brain-to-brain loop in laboratory testing.

Authors:  Mario Plebani; Giuseppe Lippi
Journal:  Clin Chem Lab Med       Date:  2011-06-13       Impact factor: 3.694

5.  Factors contributing to inappropriate ordering of tests in an academic medical department and the effect of an educational feedback strategy.

Authors:  Spiros Miyakis; Georgios Karamanof; Michalis Liontos; Theodore D Mountokalakis
Journal:  Postgrad Med J       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 2.401

6.  An epidemiology-based model as a tool to monitor the outbreak of inappropriateness in tumor marker requests: a national scale study.

Authors:  Massimo Gion; Lucia Peloso; Chiara Trevisiol; Elisa Squarcina; Marco Zappa; Aline S C Fabricio
Journal:  Clin Chem Lab Med       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 3.694

7.  The frequency and cost of redundant laboratory testing for transferred ED patients.

Authors:  Jonathan G Rogg; J Tyler Rubin; Paul Hansen; Shan W Liu
Journal:  Am J Emerg Med       Date:  2013-05-20       Impact factor: 2.469

8.  Population-based study of repeat laboratory testing.

Authors:  Carl van Walraven; Michael Raymond
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 8.327

Review 9.  The landscape of inappropriate laboratory testing: a 15-year meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ming Zhi; Eric L Ding; Jesse Theisen-Toupal; Julia Whelan; Ramy Arnaout
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-15       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  The Value of In Vitro Diagnostic Testing in Medical Practice: A Status Report.

Authors:  Ulrich-Peter Rohr; Carmen Binder; Thomas Dieterle; Francesco Giusti; Carlo Guiseppe Mario Messina; Eduard Toerien; Holger Moch; Hans Hendrik Schäfer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-03-04       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  8 in total

1.  Cancer diagnostics: current concepts and future perspectives.

Authors:  Martina Montagnana; Giuseppe Lippi
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2017-07

2.  Appropriateness of tumor marker request: a case of study.

Authors:  Massimo Gion; Chiara Trevisiol; Aline S C Fabricio
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2017-07

3.  BRCA population screening for predicting breast cancer: for or against?

Authors:  Giuseppe Lippi; Camilla Mattiuzzi; Martina Montagnana
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2017-07

4.  Doc, can you test me for "toxic metals"? Challenges of testing for toxicants in patients with environmental concerns.

Authors:  Lauren Zajac; Sarah A Johnson; Marissa Hauptman
Journal:  Curr Probl Pediatr Adolesc Health Care       Date:  2020-02-27

5.  Microalbuminuria and Traditional Serum Biomarkers of Nephropathy among Diabetic Patients at Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital in South Western Uganda.

Authors:  Ritah Kiconco; Simon Peter Rugera; Gertrude N Kiwanuka
Journal:  J Diabetes Res       Date:  2019-12-16       Impact factor: 4.011

6.  Identification of Predictors of Abnormal Calcium, Magnesium and Phosphorus Blood Levels in the Emergency Department: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Authors:  Antoine Lapointe; Nikyel Royer Moreau; David Simonyan; François Rousseau; Viviane Mallette; Frédérique Préfontaine-Racine; Caroline Paquette; Myriam Mallet; Annie St-Pierre; Simon Berthelot
Journal:  Open Access Emerg Med       Date:  2021-01-18

7.  Deep into Laboratory: An Artificial Intelligence Approach to Recommend Laboratory Tests.

Authors:  Md Mohaimenul Islam; Tahmina Nasrin Poly; Hsuan-Chia Yang; Yu-Chuan Jack Li
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-29

8.  Clinical decision support improves the appropriateness of laboratory test ordering in primary care without increasing diagnostic error: the ELMO cluster randomized trial.

Authors:  Nicolas Delvaux; Veerle Piessens; Tine De Burghgraeve; Pavlos Mamouris; Bert Vaes; Robert Vander Stichele; Hanne Cloetens; Josse Thomas; Dirk Ramaekers; An De Sutter; Bert Aertgeerts
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2020-11-04       Impact factor: 7.327

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.