Do we know what inappropriate laboratory utilization is? - A systematic review of laboratory clinical audits

被引:262
作者
van Walraven, C [1 ]
Naylor, CD [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
来源
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION | 1998年 / 280卷 / 06期
关键词
D O I
10.1001/jama.280.6.550
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective.-Laboratory utilization has steadily increased, and some studies suggest inappropriate utilization. Therefore, we wished to assess studies that measure inappropriate laboratory use in light of methodological criteria. Design.-Systematic review of published studies. Data Sources.-MEDLINE, HEALTHSTAR, and EMBASE databases were searched from 1966 to September 1997 using a broad and inclusive strategy with no language restriction. In addition, the references of all retrieved studies and 3 textbooks on diagnostic testing were hand-searched. Study Selection.-All studies that provided and applied criteria for inappropriate laboratory use. Data Extraction.-Studies were categorized based on whether the criteria were implicit (objective criteria for inappropriate utilization not provided or very broad) or explicit. Guidelines for evaluation were applied to each study by a single reviewer. Data Synthesis.-Forty-four eligible studies were identified. Eleven studies used implicit criteria for inappropriate laboratory utilization and contained small numbers of patients or physicians. Most did not adequately assess the reliability of the implicit criteria. Thirty-three studies used explicit criteria based on the appropriateness of test choice, frequency, and timing, as well as the probability of a positive result. There were large variations in the estimates of inappropriate laboratory use (4.5%-95%). Evidence supporting the explicit criteria was frequently weak by the standards suggested for therapeutic maneuvers, but was nonetheless compelling based on principles of physiology, pharmacology, and probability. Conclusions.-Many studies identify inappropriate laboratory use based on implicit or explicit criteria that do not meet methodological standards suggested for audits of therapeutic maneuvers. Researchers should develop alternative evidentiary standards for measuring inappropriateness of laboratory test use.
引用
收藏
页码:550 / 558
页数:9
相关论文
共 135 条
[81]  
MURRAY PR, 1975, MAYO CLIN PROC, V50, P339
[82]  
MYERS LP, 1985, WESTERN J MED, V143, P397
[83]   Users' guides to the medical literature .11. How to use an article about a clinical utilization review [J].
Naylor, CD ;
Guyatt, GH .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1996, 275 (18) :1435-1439
[84]  
Nightingale P G, 1994, Qual Health Care, V3, P23, DOI 10.1136/qshc.3.1.23
[85]   RISK PREFERENCE AND DECISION-MAKING IN CRITICAL CARE SITUATIONS [J].
NIGHTINGALE, SD ;
GRANT, M .
CHEST, 1988, 93 (04) :684-687
[86]   RISK PREFERENCE AND ADMITTING RATES OF EMERGENCY ROOM PHYSICIANS [J].
NIGHTINGALE, SD .
MEDICAL CARE, 1988, 26 (01) :84-87
[87]  
OHKUBO A, 1995, JPN J CLIN PATHOL, V43, P647
[88]  
*ONT MIN HLTH, 1994, LAB SERV REV REP MIN
[89]  
*ONT MIN HLTH, 1995, SAL FEAT LAB IND ONT
[90]  
PANZER RJ, 1991, DIAGNOSTIC STRATEGIE