Literature DB >> 8130460

Computers, quality, and the clinical laboratory: a look at critical value reporting.

K E Tate1, R M Gardner.   

Abstract

The reporting of critical values is an important function of the clinical laboratory. The success of critical value reporting depends on laboratory personnel recognizing critical values and effectively communicating them to clinicians, and on clinicians correctly interpreting and using the critical values to provide appropriate patient care. At LDS Hospital, we have conducted a study of the critical value reporting process. Results of the study indicate that few critical values are actually reported by the clinical laboratory (only 28 of 294 critical values during November 24-30, 1992). Data on the quality of critical value documentation showed that 19 of 124 (15%) patient charts audited during January-February, 1993 contained no documentation that clinicians were ever aware of the critical value, or that corrective actions were taken. Other data on the quality of critical value reporting were also collected and analyzed. Study results have been used to design and implement a computerized critical value reporting system to improve the quality of critical value reporting at our hospital.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8130460      PMCID: PMC2248502     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care        ISSN: 0195-4210


  4 in total

1.  Trends in quality management.

Authors:  R C Bartlett
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 5.534

2.  Critical (panic) value notification: an established laboratory practice policy (parameter)

Authors:  G D Lundberg
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1990-02-02       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  A computerized laboratory alerting system.

Authors:  K E Tate; R M Gardner; L K Weaver
Journal:  MD Comput       Date:  1990 Sep-Oct

4.  Reminders to physicians from an introspective computer medical record. A two-year randomized trial.

Authors:  C J McDonald; S L Hui; D M Smith; W M Tierney; S J Cohen; M Weinberger; G P McCabe
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1984-01       Impact factor: 25.391

  4 in total
  5 in total

1.  How promptly are inpatients treated for critical laboratory results?

Authors:  G J Kuperman; D Boyle; A Jha; E Rittenberg; N Ma'Luf; M J Tanasijevic; J M Teich; J Winkelman; D W Bates
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  1998 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 2.  Managing the pre- and post-analytical phases of the total testing process.

Authors:  Robert Hawkins
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2011-12-20       Impact factor: 3.464

3.  Potential identifiability and preventability of adverse events using information systems.

Authors:  D W Bates; A C O'Neil; D Boyle; J Teich; G M Chertow; A L Komaroff; T A Brennan
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  1994 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 4.  Asynchronous automated electronic laboratory result notifications: a systematic review.

Authors:  Benjamin H Slovis; Thomas A Nahass; Hojjat Salmasian; Gilad Kuperman; David K Vawdrey
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2017-11-01       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 5.  The safety implications of missed test results for hospitalised patients: a systematic review.

Authors:  Joanne Callen; Andrew Georgiou; Julie Li; Johanna I Westbrook
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2011-02-07       Impact factor: 7.035

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.