Laboratory Medicine Best Practices: Systematic Evidence Review and Evaluation Methods for Quality Improvement

被引:49
作者
Christenson, Robert H. [1 ]
Snyder, Susan R. [2 ]
Shaw, Colleen S. [2 ]
Derzon, James H. [3 ]
Black, Robert S. [3 ]
Mass, Diana [4 ]
Epner, Paul [5 ]
Favoretto, Alessandra M. [3 ]
Liebow, Edward B. [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Maryland, Sch Med, Baltimore, MD 21201 USA
[2] Ctr Dis Control & Prevent, Lab Res & Evaluat Branch, Div Lab Sci & Stand, Off Surveillance Epidemiol & Lab Serv, Atlanta, GA USA
[3] Battelle Ctr Publ Hlth Res & Evaluat, Seattle, WA USA
[4] Arizona State Univ, Sch Life Sci, Clin Sci Lab, Tempe, AZ USA
[5] Paul Epner LLC, Evanston, IL USA
关键词
ERRORS; PRINCIPLES; GUIDELINES;
D O I
10.1373/clinchem.2010.157131
中图分类号
R446 [实验室诊断]; R-33 [实验医学、医学实验];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE: To develop methods for systematically reviewing evidence for identifying effective laboratory medicine (LM) practices associated with improved healthcare quality outcomes. RELEVANCE: Although many evidence-evaluation systems have been developed, none are designed to include and rate healthcare quality improvement studies to identify evidence-based practices that improve patient safety and LM quality. METHODS: Validated evidence-based medicine methods established by governmental agencies, the Guide to Community Preventive Services, and others were adapted for the LM field. Key methods modifications included (a) inclusion of quality improvement study designs; (b) mechanisms for inclusion of unpublished evidence, (c) combining of individual ratings of study quality, effect size, and relevance of outcome measures to evaluate consistency of practice evidence; and (d) deriving an overall strength rating to support evidence-based best practice recommendations. The methods follow the process steps of: ask; acquire; appraise; analyze; apply; and assess. Expert panels used the systematic evidence review results on practice effectiveness for improving healthcare quality outcomes consistent with the Institute of Medicine's healthcare quality aims (safe, timely, effective, equitable, efficient, and patient-centered). CONCLUSIONS: Adapting and developing methods from validated systems and applying them to systematically review and evaluate practices in LM by using published and unpublished studies is feasible. With these methods, evidence from quality improvement studies can be systematically synthesized and summarized to identify effective LM practices. Practical and scientifically validated demonstration of a positive impact on outcomes ensures that practitioners, policy makers, and decision makers at all levels have the evidence needed for improving healthcare quality and public health. (C) 2011 American Association for Clinical Chemistry
引用
收藏
页码:816 / 825
页数:10
相关论文
共 35 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], PATIENT SAFETY INCID
[2]  
[Anonymous], COCHRANE HDB SYSTEMA
[3]  
[Anonymous], GRADE DEF
[4]  
[Anonymous], COMMUN ONCOL
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2009, INT STAT REV
[6]  
[Anonymous], LAB MED BEST PRACT D
[7]  
[Anonymous], CHANG PRACT UND ID O
[8]  
[Anonymous], 2000, ERR IS HUMAN BUILDIN
[9]  
[Anonymous], APPL EVIDENCE BASED
[10]  
[Anonymous], METH REF GUID EFF CO