PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 17022878

Reflective testing: what do patients think?

Sarah G Paterson·Jean E Robson·Michael J McMahon·Gwen Baxter·Michael J Murphy·John R Paterson
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Reflective testing refers to the practice of adding on tests by laboratory staff. Little is known about what patients think of this practice. METHODS: We surveyed patients attending a general practice surgery and patients attending hospital outpatient clinics. We sought their views about the practice of adding on tests and about the information they received from requesting clinicians about their investigations. RESULTS: In both groups of patients, large majorities favoured an approach in which relevant additional tests are performed without consulting the requesting clinician or patient first. Most patients also felt that the requesting clinicians had provided a satisfactory explanation about what tests were to be performed and why. CONCLUSION: Most patients are content to let NHS professionals add on relevant tests if this is felt to be in their interest.

Explore related subjects

Clinical Chemistry TestsClinical CompetenceClinical Laboratory TechniquesHumansPatientsSurveys and QuestionnairesJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Sarah G Paterson, Jean E Robson, Michael J McMahon, Gwen Baxter, Michael J Murphy, John R Paterson. 2006. Reflective testing: what do patients think?. https://doi.org/10.1258/000456306778520098

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Lab-on-a-chip devices for global health: past studies and future opportunities.

A rapidly emerging field in lab-on-a-chip (LOC) research is the development of devices to improve the health of people in developing countries. In this review, we identify diseases that are most in need of new health technologies, discuss special design criteria for LOC devices to be deployed in a variety of resource-poor settings, and review past research into LOC devices for global health. We focus mainly on diagnostics, the nearest-term application in this field.

Clinical Chemistry Tests↗
PubMed2006

A note on the use of outlier criteria in Ontario laboratory quality control schemes.

OBJECTIVES: This paper examines the pitfalls that arise when an outlier is assessed using a criterion based on a fixed multiple of the standard deviation rather than an established statistical test. Although the former approach is statistically invalid, it is the favored method for identifying outliers in Ontario laboratory quality control protocols. DESIGN AND METHODS: Computer simulations are used to calculate the probability of a false positive result (classifying a valid observation as an outlier) when outlier criteria based on fixed multiples of the standard deviation are applied to samples containing no outliers. RESULTS: The estimated probability of a false positive result is tabulated over various sample sizes. Outlier criteria based on fixed multiples of the standard deviation are shown to be highly inefficient. CONCLUSIONS: This work presents arguments for discontinuing the widespread practice of using outlier criteria based on fixed multiples of the standard deviation to identify outliers in univariate samples.

Clinical Chemistry Tests↗
PubMed2006

Sample to sample carryover: a source of analytical laboratory error and its relevance to integrated clinical chemistry/immunoassay systems.

BACKGROUND: Integrated systems that combine clinical chemistry and immunoassay analyzers are used routinely. Sample to sample carryover is an inherent risk and can cause erroneously high patient test results for immunoassays. IVD manufacturers and laboratories must be aware of this phenomenon and guard against it. METHODS: We used a sample carryover protocol that directs the clinical chemistry module to process samples with very high immunoassay analyte concentrations followed by samples with very low concentrations for the same analyte. Low concentration samples were then tested by the immunoassay module to determine if the clinical chemistry module caused primary sample tube to primary sample tube carryover of the immunoassay analyte. RESULTS: Sample carryover was assessed on the Abbott ci8200 for HBsAg, AFP, beta-hCG, and PSA. Observed HBsAg carryover met the design specification of <0.1 ppm. Carryover for the other analytes was <0.1 ppm or below the assay limit of detection. CONCLUSIONS: IVD manufacturers must design integrated systems to minimize primary specimen tube carryover and avoid analytical laboratory error that can impact patient safety. Carryover testing is difficult for clinical laboratories to perform in order to verify system performance. Laboratories must consider the potential for specimen carryover and its impact on results whether moving primary sample tubes between separate analyzers or using an integrated system.

Clinical Chemistry Tests↗