PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Paul Valenstein

Publications and source records attributed to Paul Valenstein.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Laboratory benchmarking: the College of American Pathologists' experience.

Benchmarking is an important part of performance evaluation in the clinical laboratory. When used effectively, benchmarking can lead to significant changes and performance improvement. This article reviews the experience of the College of American Pathologists (CAP) with benchmarking clinical laboratory expenses and presents data that summarizes recent laboratory trends identified through CAP's benchmark data.

Benchmarking↗

Five-year follow-up of routine outpatient test turnaround time: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study.

CONTEXT: Timely reporting of outpatient tests can increase efficiency of care and improve customer satisfaction. OBJECTIVES: We conducted a survey in 2002 to determine how quickly hospital-based laboratories turned around routine requests for 3 common assays and compared the results with a similar survey conducted in 1997. DESIGN: One hundred eighteen laboratories prospectively recorded the collection-to-verification turnaround time for 9252 complete blood cell counts (CBCs), 8832 thyroid tests, and 9193 basic metabolic panels. RESULTS: The median facility reported all test results by 7:00 am of the weekday immediately after the date of specimen collection. The bottom 10% of institutions reported 99% of CBCs and basic metabolic panels within 1 day and 60% of thyroid tests within 1 day. The 65 institutions that participated in both the 1997 and 2002 surveys showed significant overall improvement in turnaround time for all 3 types of tests (P <.001). In 2002, federal institutions had significantly slower turnaround times than nonfederal institutions for CBC tests (P <.001), thyroid tests (P =.03), and basic metabolic panels (P <.001). Other demographic and practice variables were not associated with turnaround time. CONCLUSION: The turnaround time of routine outpatient tests appears to have improved between 1997 and 2002.

Blood Cell Count↗

Six-year trends in laboratory computer availability.

CONTEXT: Failure of a clinical laboratory computer system can disrupt work flow and charge capture and affect patient care. The first comprehensive survey of computer downtime was conducted in 1995 and demonstrated significant interinstitutional variation in system availability. Despite numerous changes in the laboratory and computer industries since 1995, no follow-up study has been reported. OBJECTIVES: To quantify current laboratory computer availability and compare it with 1995 performance. DESIGN: Ninety-seven laboratories prospectively recorded the frequency and duration of computer downtime during 30 days in 2001. Results were compared with 1995 survey data. RESULTS: For the median facility, the number of downtime episodes decreased from 8 events per 30 days during 1995 to 3 events per 30 days during 2001 (P <.01). The frequency of unscheduled downtime also improved, from a median of 2 to 0.5 events per 30 days (P <.01). Reduced downtime events were paralleled by reduced cumulative downtime (14.3 vs 4.0 hours per 30 days; P <.01). Improvements were not restricted to the median facility; laboratories performing in the bottom quartile in 2001 recorded substantially less downtime than laboratories in the bottom quartile in 1995. When the comparison was restricted to the 37 institutions that participated in both the 1995 and 2001 surveys, a significant reduction in overall downtime and unscheduled downtime events was still evident (P <.01). More recent installation of vendor software patches was associated with a reduced frequency of downtime events in the 2001 data set. CONCLUSION: Laboratory computer downtime was less frequent in 2001 than in 1995; industry performance appears to be improving.

Clinical Laboratory Information Systems↗