Cargando…

The Landscape of Inappropriate Laboratory Testing: A 15-Year Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND: Laboratory testing is the single highest-volume medical activity and drives clinical decision-making across medicine. However, the overall landscape of inappropriate testing, which is thought to be dominated by repeat testing, is unclear. Systematic differences in initial vs. repeat test...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhi, Ming, Ding, Eric L., Theisen-Toupal, Jesse, Whelan, Julia, Arnaout, Ramy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3829815/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24260139
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0078962
_version_ 1782291394953478144
author Zhi, Ming
Ding, Eric L.
Theisen-Toupal, Jesse
Whelan, Julia
Arnaout, Ramy
author_facet Zhi, Ming
Ding, Eric L.
Theisen-Toupal, Jesse
Whelan, Julia
Arnaout, Ramy
author_sort Zhi, Ming
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Laboratory testing is the single highest-volume medical activity and drives clinical decision-making across medicine. However, the overall landscape of inappropriate testing, which is thought to be dominated by repeat testing, is unclear. Systematic differences in initial vs. repeat testing, measurement criteria, and other factors would suggest new priorities for improving laboratory testing. METHODS: A multi-database systematic review was performed on published studies from 1997–2012 using strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. Over- vs. underutilization, initial vs. repeat testing, low- vs. high-volume testing, subjective vs. objective appropriateness criteria, and restrictive vs. permissive appropriateness criteria, among other factors, were assessed. RESULTS: Overall mean rates of over- and underutilization were 20.6% (95% CI 16.2–24.9%) and 44.8% (95% CI 33.8–55.8%). Overutilization during initial testing (43.9%; 95% CI 35.4–52.5%) was six times higher than during repeat testing (7.4%; 95% CI 2.5–12.3%; P for stratum difference <0.001). Overutilization of low-volume tests (32.2%; 95% CI 25.0–39.4%) was three times that of high-volume tests (10.2%; 95% CI 2.6–17.7%; P<0.001). Overutilization measured according to restrictive criteria (44.2%; 95% CI 36.8–51.6%) was three times higher than for permissive criteria (12.0%; 95% CI 8.0–16.0%; P<0.001). Overutilization measured using subjective criteria (29.0%; 95% CI 21.9–36.1%) was nearly twice as high as for objective criteria (16.1%; 95% CI 11.0–21.2%; P = 0.004). Together, these factors explained over half (54%) of the overall variability in overutilization. There were no statistically significant differences between studies from the United States vs. elsewhere (P = 0.38) or among chemistry, hematology, microbiology, and molecular tests (P = 0.05–0.65) and no robust statistically significant trends over time. CONCLUSIONS: The landscape of overutilization varies systematically by clinical setting (initial vs. repeat), test volume, and measurement criteria. Underutilization is also widespread, but understudied. Expanding the current focus on reducing repeat testing to include ordering the right test during initial evaluation may lead to fewer errors and better care.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3829815
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-38298152013-11-20 The Landscape of Inappropriate Laboratory Testing: A 15-Year Meta-Analysis Zhi, Ming Ding, Eric L. Theisen-Toupal, Jesse Whelan, Julia Arnaout, Ramy PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Laboratory testing is the single highest-volume medical activity and drives clinical decision-making across medicine. However, the overall landscape of inappropriate testing, which is thought to be dominated by repeat testing, is unclear. Systematic differences in initial vs. repeat testing, measurement criteria, and other factors would suggest new priorities for improving laboratory testing. METHODS: A multi-database systematic review was performed on published studies from 1997–2012 using strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. Over- vs. underutilization, initial vs. repeat testing, low- vs. high-volume testing, subjective vs. objective appropriateness criteria, and restrictive vs. permissive appropriateness criteria, among other factors, were assessed. RESULTS: Overall mean rates of over- and underutilization were 20.6% (95% CI 16.2–24.9%) and 44.8% (95% CI 33.8–55.8%). Overutilization during initial testing (43.9%; 95% CI 35.4–52.5%) was six times higher than during repeat testing (7.4%; 95% CI 2.5–12.3%; P for stratum difference <0.001). Overutilization of low-volume tests (32.2%; 95% CI 25.0–39.4%) was three times that of high-volume tests (10.2%; 95% CI 2.6–17.7%; P<0.001). Overutilization measured according to restrictive criteria (44.2%; 95% CI 36.8–51.6%) was three times higher than for permissive criteria (12.0%; 95% CI 8.0–16.0%; P<0.001). Overutilization measured using subjective criteria (29.0%; 95% CI 21.9–36.1%) was nearly twice as high as for objective criteria (16.1%; 95% CI 11.0–21.2%; P = 0.004). Together, these factors explained over half (54%) of the overall variability in overutilization. There were no statistically significant differences between studies from the United States vs. elsewhere (P = 0.38) or among chemistry, hematology, microbiology, and molecular tests (P = 0.05–0.65) and no robust statistically significant trends over time. CONCLUSIONS: The landscape of overutilization varies systematically by clinical setting (initial vs. repeat), test volume, and measurement criteria. Underutilization is also widespread, but understudied. Expanding the current focus on reducing repeat testing to include ordering the right test during initial evaluation may lead to fewer errors and better care. Public Library of Science 2013-11-15 /pmc/articles/PMC3829815/ /pubmed/24260139 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0078962 Text en © 2013 Zhi et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Zhi, Ming
Ding, Eric L.
Theisen-Toupal, Jesse
Whelan, Julia
Arnaout, Ramy
The Landscape of Inappropriate Laboratory Testing: A 15-Year Meta-Analysis
title The Landscape of Inappropriate Laboratory Testing: A 15-Year Meta-Analysis
title_full The Landscape of Inappropriate Laboratory Testing: A 15-Year Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr The Landscape of Inappropriate Laboratory Testing: A 15-Year Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed The Landscape of Inappropriate Laboratory Testing: A 15-Year Meta-Analysis
title_short The Landscape of Inappropriate Laboratory Testing: A 15-Year Meta-Analysis
title_sort landscape of inappropriate laboratory testing: a 15-year meta-analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3829815/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24260139
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0078962
work_keys_str_mv AT zhiming thelandscapeofinappropriatelaboratorytestinga15yearmetaanalysis
AT dingericl thelandscapeofinappropriatelaboratorytestinga15yearmetaanalysis
AT theisentoupaljesse thelandscapeofinappropriatelaboratorytestinga15yearmetaanalysis
AT whelanjulia thelandscapeofinappropriatelaboratorytestinga15yearmetaanalysis
AT arnaoutramy thelandscapeofinappropriatelaboratorytestinga15yearmetaanalysis
AT zhiming landscapeofinappropriatelaboratorytestinga15yearmetaanalysis
AT dingericl landscapeofinappropriatelaboratorytestinga15yearmetaanalysis
AT theisentoupaljesse landscapeofinappropriatelaboratorytestinga15yearmetaanalysis
AT whelanjulia landscapeofinappropriatelaboratorytestinga15yearmetaanalysis
AT arnaoutramy landscapeofinappropriatelaboratorytestinga15yearmetaanalysis