住院病人检验利用率和检验量基准:Q-Probes 研究。

Peter L Perrotta, Suzanne Coulter, Barbara J Blond, Thomas Long, Ron B Schifman
{"title":"住院病人检验利用率和检验量基准:Q-Probes 研究。","authors":"Peter L Perrotta, Suzanne Coulter, Barbara J Blond, Thomas Long, Ron B Schifman","doi":"10.5858/arpa.2024-0104-CP","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context.—: </strong>Test-ordering practices vary widely between and within health care organizations, and methods used to benchmark test utilization data are unstandardized.</p><p><strong>Objective.—: </strong>To develop and apply standardized methodology to compare inpatient test utilization data submitted by laboratories enrolled in a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study.</p><p><strong>Design.—: </strong>Participating laboratories provided inpatient test volumes for 50 designated analytes and total inpatient days for 2019 or a recent 12-month period. Test utilization patterns were characterized by studying test volumes standardized per 1000 inpatient days. Test volume variability used the standardized median absolute deviation; standardized test volumes were evaluated by calculating comparative ranges for each analyte. Standardized test volumes falling outside their respective comparative ranges are referred to as outliers in this study. Volume data were tested for association with stewardship practices and institutional demographics.</p><p><strong>Results.—: </strong>Methodology using standardized test volume data identified test groups that are commonly used in the inpatient setting and efficiently identified volume outliers. High test volume outliers included creatine kinase myocardial band, free prostate-specific antigen, myoglobin, serotonin release assay, and hepatitis B serologies; no low-volume outliers were observed. Among 33 participants, 13 (39%) had no test volume outliers, while 5 (15%) showed multiple tests (13-34) with comparatively high volumes. No statistically significant relationships were found between stewardship practices and test-ordering patterns.</p><p><strong>Conclusions.—: </strong>Our approach can be used to measure inpatient test volume data across organizations and for identifying test volumes falling outside of the standardized comparative ranges that may require interventions to change test utilization practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":93883,"journal":{"name":"Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Inpatient Test Utilization and Test Volume Benchmarking: A Q-Probes Study.\",\"authors\":\"Peter L Perrotta, Suzanne Coulter, Barbara J Blond, Thomas Long, Ron B Schifman\",\"doi\":\"10.5858/arpa.2024-0104-CP\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context.—: </strong>Test-ordering practices vary widely between and within health care organizations, and methods used to benchmark test utilization data are unstandardized.</p><p><strong>Objective.—: </strong>To develop and apply standardized methodology to compare inpatient test utilization data submitted by laboratories enrolled in a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study.</p><p><strong>Design.—: </strong>Participating laboratories provided inpatient test volumes for 50 designated analytes and total inpatient days for 2019 or a recent 12-month period. Test utilization patterns were characterized by studying test volumes standardized per 1000 inpatient days. Test volume variability used the standardized median absolute deviation; standardized test volumes were evaluated by calculating comparative ranges for each analyte. Standardized test volumes falling outside their respective comparative ranges are referred to as outliers in this study. Volume data were tested for association with stewardship practices and institutional demographics.</p><p><strong>Results.—: </strong>Methodology using standardized test volume data identified test groups that are commonly used in the inpatient setting and efficiently identified volume outliers. High test volume outliers included creatine kinase myocardial band, free prostate-specific antigen, myoglobin, serotonin release assay, and hepatitis B serologies; no low-volume outliers were observed. Among 33 participants, 13 (39%) had no test volume outliers, while 5 (15%) showed multiple tests (13-34) with comparatively high volumes. No statistically significant relationships were found between stewardship practices and test-ordering patterns.</p><p><strong>Conclusions.—: </strong>Our approach can be used to measure inpatient test volume data across organizations and for identifying test volumes falling outside of the standardized comparative ranges that may require interventions to change test utilization practices.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93883,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2024-0104-CP\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2024-0104-CP","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景医疗机构之间以及医疗机构内部的检验订单做法大相径庭,用于基准检验利用数据的方法也没有标准化:开发并应用标准化方法,对参加美国病理学家学会 Q-Probes 研究的实验室提交的住院病人检验利用率数据进行比较:参与研究的实验室提供 2019 年或最近 12 个月期间 50 种指定分析物的住院检验量和住院总天数。通过研究每 1000 个住院日的标准化检验量来描述检验利用模式。检验量变异性采用标准化中位绝对偏差;标准化检验量通过计算每种分析物的比较范围进行评估。本研究将超出各自比较范围的标准化检测量称为异常值。测试了检测量数据与监管实践和机构人口统计学的关联:使用标准化检验量数据的方法确定了住院环境中常用的检验组,并有效地确定了检验量异常值。高检验量异常值包括肌酸激酶心肌带、游离前列腺特异性抗原、肌红蛋白、5-羟色胺释放测定和乙型肝炎血清学检查;未发现低检验量异常值。在 33 名参与者中,有 13 人(39%)没有检测量异常值,而有 5 人(15%)的多次检测(13-34 次)检测量相对较高。在统计意义上,没有发现管理实践与检验订购模式之间存在明显的关系:我们的方法可用于测量各机构的住院病人检验量数据,并用于识别超出标准化比较范围的检验量,这些检验量可能需要采取干预措施来改变检验使用方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Inpatient Test Utilization and Test Volume Benchmarking: A Q-Probes Study.

Context.—: Test-ordering practices vary widely between and within health care organizations, and methods used to benchmark test utilization data are unstandardized.

Objective.—: To develop and apply standardized methodology to compare inpatient test utilization data submitted by laboratories enrolled in a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study.

Design.—: Participating laboratories provided inpatient test volumes for 50 designated analytes and total inpatient days for 2019 or a recent 12-month period. Test utilization patterns were characterized by studying test volumes standardized per 1000 inpatient days. Test volume variability used the standardized median absolute deviation; standardized test volumes were evaluated by calculating comparative ranges for each analyte. Standardized test volumes falling outside their respective comparative ranges are referred to as outliers in this study. Volume data were tested for association with stewardship practices and institutional demographics.

Results.—: Methodology using standardized test volume data identified test groups that are commonly used in the inpatient setting and efficiently identified volume outliers. High test volume outliers included creatine kinase myocardial band, free prostate-specific antigen, myoglobin, serotonin release assay, and hepatitis B serologies; no low-volume outliers were observed. Among 33 participants, 13 (39%) had no test volume outliers, while 5 (15%) showed multiple tests (13-34) with comparatively high volumes. No statistically significant relationships were found between stewardship practices and test-ordering patterns.

Conclusions.—: Our approach can be used to measure inpatient test volume data across organizations and for identifying test volumes falling outside of the standardized comparative ranges that may require interventions to change test utilization practices.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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