A Generalizable Decision-Making Framework for Selecting Onsite versus Send-out Clinical Laboratory Testing.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Medical Decision Making Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-06 DOI:10.1177/0272989X241232666
Lee F Schroeder, Paul Rebman, Parastu Kasaie, Ernest Kenu, Jon Zelner, David W Dowdy
{"title":"A Generalizable Decision-Making Framework for Selecting Onsite versus Send-out Clinical Laboratory Testing.","authors":"Lee F Schroeder, Paul Rebman, Parastu Kasaie, Ernest Kenu, Jon Zelner, David W Dowdy","doi":"10.1177/0272989X241232666","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Laboratory networks provide services through onsite testing or through specimen transport to higher-tier laboratories. This decision is based on the interplay of testing characteristics, treatment characteristics, and epidemiological characteristics.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Our objective was to develop a generalizable model using the threshold approach to medical decision making to inform test placement decisions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed a decision model to compare the incremental utility of onsite versus send-out testing for clinical purposes. We then performed Monte Carlo simulations to identify the settings under which each strategy would be preferred. Tuberculosis was modeled as an exemplar.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The most important determinants of the decision to test onsite versus send-out were the clinical utility lost due to send-out testing delays and the accuracy decrement with onsite testing. When the sensitivity decrements of onsite testing were minimal, onsite testing tended to be preferred when send-out delays reduced clinical utility by >20%. By contrast, when onsite testing incurred large reductions in sensitivity, onsite testing tended to be preferred when utility lost due to delays was >50%. The relative cost of onsite versus send-out testing affected these thresholds, particularly when testing costs were >10% of treatment costs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Decision makers can select onsite versus send-out testing in an evidence-based fashion using estimates of the percentage of clinical utility lost due to send-out delays and the relative accuracy of onsite versus send-out testing. This model is designed to be generalizable to a wide variety of use cases.</p><p><strong>Highlights: </strong>The design of laboratory networks, including the decision to place diagnostic instruments at the point-of-care or at higher tiers as accessed through specimen transport, can be informed using the threshold approach to medical decision making.The most important determinants of the decision to test onsite versus send-out were the clinical utility lost due to send-out testing delays and the accuracy decrement with onsite testing.The threshold approach to medical decision making can be used to compare point-of-care testing accuracy decrements with the lost utility of treatment due to send-out testing delays.The relative cost of onsite versus send-out testing affected these thresholds, particularly when testing costs were >10% of treatment costs.</p>","PeriodicalId":49839,"journal":{"name":"Medical Decision Making","volume":" ","pages":"307-319"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10987262/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X241232666","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Laboratory networks provide services through onsite testing or through specimen transport to higher-tier laboratories. This decision is based on the interplay of testing characteristics, treatment characteristics, and epidemiological characteristics.

Objectives: Our objective was to develop a generalizable model using the threshold approach to medical decision making to inform test placement decisions.

Methods: We developed a decision model to compare the incremental utility of onsite versus send-out testing for clinical purposes. We then performed Monte Carlo simulations to identify the settings under which each strategy would be preferred. Tuberculosis was modeled as an exemplar.

Results: The most important determinants of the decision to test onsite versus send-out were the clinical utility lost due to send-out testing delays and the accuracy decrement with onsite testing. When the sensitivity decrements of onsite testing were minimal, onsite testing tended to be preferred when send-out delays reduced clinical utility by >20%. By contrast, when onsite testing incurred large reductions in sensitivity, onsite testing tended to be preferred when utility lost due to delays was >50%. The relative cost of onsite versus send-out testing affected these thresholds, particularly when testing costs were >10% of treatment costs.

Conclusions: Decision makers can select onsite versus send-out testing in an evidence-based fashion using estimates of the percentage of clinical utility lost due to send-out delays and the relative accuracy of onsite versus send-out testing. This model is designed to be generalizable to a wide variety of use cases.

Highlights: The design of laboratory networks, including the decision to place diagnostic instruments at the point-of-care or at higher tiers as accessed through specimen transport, can be informed using the threshold approach to medical decision making.The most important determinants of the decision to test onsite versus send-out were the clinical utility lost due to send-out testing delays and the accuracy decrement with onsite testing.The threshold approach to medical decision making can be used to compare point-of-care testing accuracy decrements with the lost utility of treatment due to send-out testing delays.The relative cost of onsite versus send-out testing affected these thresholds, particularly when testing costs were >10% of treatment costs.

选择现场还是送出临床实验室检测的通用决策框架。
背景:实验室网络通过现场检测或将标本运送到更高级别的实验室来提供服务。这一决定是基于检测特征、治疗特征和流行病学特征的相互作用:我们的目标是利用医疗决策的阈值法建立一个可推广的模型,为检验安置决策提供信息:方法:我们开发了一个决策模型,用于比较现场检测与送出检测在临床上的增量效用。然后,我们进行了蒙特卡洛模拟,以确定在何种情况下每种策略更受青睐。以肺结核为例进行模拟:结果:决定现场检测还是送出检测的最重要因素是送出检测延迟造成的临床效用损失和现场检测的准确性下降。当现场检测的灵敏度下降很小时,当送出延迟使临床效用下降大于 20% 时,现场检测往往是首选。与此相反,当现场检测导致灵敏度大幅下降时,当因延迟而造成的效用损失>50%时,现场检测往往更受青睐。现场检测与送出检测的相对成本会影响这些阈值,尤其是当检测成本>治疗成本的10%时:决策者可以通过估算因延迟送出而损失的临床效用百分比以及现场检测与送出检测的相对准确性,以循证的方式选择现场检测与送出检测。该模型可广泛应用于各种情况:实验室网络的设计,包括决定将诊断仪器放置在医疗点还是通过标本运输放置在更高的层级,都可以使用医疗决策的阈值方法来进行。医疗决策的阈值法可用来比较床旁检测的准确性下降与送出检测延误造成的治疗效用损失。现场检测与送出检测的相对成本会影响这些阈值,尤其是当检测成本大于治疗成本的 10% 时。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Medical Decision Making
Medical Decision Making 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
5.60%
发文量
146
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Medical Decision Making offers rigorous and systematic approaches to decision making that are designed to improve the health and clinical care of individuals and to assist with health care policy development. Using the fundamentals of decision analysis and theory, economic evaluation, and evidence based quality assessment, Medical Decision Making presents both theoretical and practical statistical and modeling techniques and methods from a variety of disciplines.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信