PubMed · 14273148
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
J B HENRY, C W PRUITT. 1965. THIS REPORT SYSTEM REDUCES LAB ERRORS.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14273148/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
CONTEXT: Clinical laboratory assessment of test linearity is often limited to satisfying regulatory requirements rather than integrating this tool into the laboratory quality assurance program. Although an important part of quality control and method validation for clinical laboratories, linearity of clinical tests does not get the attention it deserves. OBJECTIVE: This article evaluates the concepts and importance of linearity evaluations for clinical tests. DESIGN: We describe the theory and procedural steps of each linearity evaluation. We then evaluate the statistical methods for each procedure. RESULTS: Visual assessment, although simple, is subjective. The lack-of-fit error and the 1986 NCCLS EP6-P G test are sensitive to imprecision and assume that the data are first order. Regression analysis, as developed as the polynomial method, is partly based on the experiences of the College of American Pathologists Instrumentation Resource Committee and has proved to be a robust statistical method. CONCLUSIONS: We provide general guidelines for handling non-linear results from a linearity evaluation. Handling linearity data in an objective manner will aid clinical laboratorians whose goal is to improve the quality of the tests they perform.
BACKGROUND: Most studies of interventions to reduce laboratory test utilization have occurred in academic hospital settings, used historical controls, or have had short post intervention follow-up. Interventions with the greatest impact use multiple approaches, are repeated regularly, include comparisons with physician peers, and have a personal approach. We determined whether laboratory test utilization by community physicians could be reduced by a multifaceted program of education and feedback. METHODS: We identified 200 physicians who ordered the largest number of common laboratory tests during 1 year in a nonhospital, commercial community (reference) laboratory. They were assigned to intervention and control groups (100 each). Intervention physicians were visited individually up to three times by laboratory representatives over a 2-year period. At each visit, educational material and the physician's personal laboratory test utilization data were presented and discussed briefly in general terms, with the latter compared with utilization data for the physician's peers. Overall test utilization rates 1 year before, during, and 2 years after the intervention were measured using population-based databases. Time-series analysis was used to determine the effect of the intervention on laboratory test utilization. RESULTS: The two groups began with similar test utilization: control group, 4.06 x 10(6) tests in 1.48 x 10(6) visits (2.73 tests/visit); intervention group, 3.90 x 10(6) tests in 1.41 x 10(6) visits (2.77 tests/visit). During the 2-year intervention, intention-to-treat analysis showed that utilization decreased significantly in the intervention group compared with the controls [relative reduction of 7.9% (P <0.0001); absolute reduction of 0.22 tests/visit (95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.24)]. This difference persisted until the end of study observation, or more than 2 years after the intervention ended. CONCLUSION: A multifaceted education and feedback strategy can significantly and persistently decrease laboratory utilization by practicing community physicians.
Referring to H. E. Bock's famous lectures on differential diagnostics, some recent developments are discussed. Topical remarks are given concerning modern differential diagnostics. In general, they have changed from the diagnostic of the phenotype to the detection of the pathogenesis.