Literature DB >> 9038762

Limitations of paperless on-line reporting of diagnostic bacteriology culture results.

C Block1, J Laloum, A Rajs, R Stalnikowicz, M Shapiro.   

Abstract

AIMS: To estimate the extent to which microbiology laboratory results made available on a computerised reporting system do not reach their intended destination.
METHODS: Prospective observational study of 180 urine cultures submitted from patients seen at the accident and emergency department of a 250 bed university affiliated general hospital. Observations were made of: telephone requests for results; whether results were noted in patients' charts; and antibiotic administration to patients sent home.
RESULTS: Results were requested/recorded for 73% of 37 patients admitted to hospital and for only 23% of 143 patients sent home (p < 1 x 10(-7)). Overall, results were more frequently recorded for patients with positive cultures (p = 0.04). When determined separately for admitted and discharged groups, this association was not shown. Three of 14 culture positive patients sent home and for whom results were not recorded received inappropriate therapy; 19 culture negative patients were given antibiotics.
CONCLUSIONS: In view of the results, measures were instituted to ensure delivery of printed reports to the health care providers of patients not admitted from the accident and emergency department. Organisations operating computerised reporting systems in evolving health care settings must ensure that system design guarantees delivery of reports to all end-users. This will minimise therapeutic problems, reduce wastage of laboratory resources, and limit risks of litigation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 9038762      PMCID: PMC500727          DOI: 10.1136/jcp.49.9.759

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Pathol        ISSN: 0021-9746            Impact factor:   3.411


  6 in total

1.  Ordering patterns and utilization of bacteriologic culture reports.

Authors:  L D Edwards; S Levin; R Balagtas; P Lowe; W Landau; M H Lepper
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1973-11

2.  Documentation of blood culture results.

Authors:  R A Howe; C J Bates; P Cowling; N Young; R C Spencer
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 3.411

3.  Consumer survey on microbiology reports.

Authors:  V P Ackerman; R C Pritchard; D J Obbink; R Bradbury; A Lee
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1979-01-27       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Influence of laboratory reports on prescribing of antimicrobials for urinary tract infection.

Authors:  M P Barnes
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  1980-05       Impact factor: 3.411

5.  Use of microbiology reports by physicians in prescribing antimicrobial agents.

Authors:  L Campo; J M Mylotte
Journal:  Am J Med Sci       Date:  1988-12       Impact factor: 2.378

6.  Quantification of errors in laboratory reports. A quality improvement study of the College of American Pathologists' Q-Probes program.

Authors:  P J Howanitz; K Walker; P Bachner
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 5.534

  6 in total
  3 in total

1.  Benefits and limitations of computerised laboratory data.

Authors:  C Block
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 3.411

2.  Do Consultants Follow Up on Tests They Recommend? Insights from an Academic Inpatient Gastrointestinal Consult Service.

Authors:  Benjamin E Cassell; Ted Walker; Saad Alghamdi; Jason Bill; Pierre Blais; Harold Boutté; Jeffrey W Brown; Gregory S Sayuk; C Prakash Gyawali
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2017-04-08       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 3.  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

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.