Alexis B Carter, Andrea L Berger, Richard Schreiber
{"title":"实验室检验名称很重要:关于什么对订单和结果有效、什么对订单和结果无效的调查。","authors":"Alexis B Carter, Andrea L Berger, Richard Schreiber","doi":"10.5858/arpa.2021-0314-OA","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context.—: </strong>Health care providers were surveyed to determine their ability to correctly decipher laboratory test names and their preferences for laboratory test names and result displays.</p><p><strong>Objective.—: </strong>To confirm principles for laboratory test nomenclature and display and to compare and contrast the abilities and preferences of different provider groups for laboratory test names.</p><p><strong>Design.—: </strong>Health care providers across different specialties and perspectives completed a survey of 38 questions, which included participant demographics, real-life examples of poorly named laboratory orders that they were asked to decipher, an assessment of vitamin D test name knowledge, their preferences for ideal names for tests, and their preferred display for test results. Participants were grouped and compared by profession, level of training, and the presence or absence of specialization in informatics and/or laboratory medicine.</p><p><strong>Results.—: </strong>Participants struggled with poorly named tests, especially with less commonly ordered tests. Participants' knowledge of vitamin D analyte names was poor and consistent with prior published studies. The most commonly selected ideal names correlated positively with the percentage of the authors' previously developed naming rules (R = 0.54, P < .001). There was strong consensus across groups for the best result display.</p><p><strong>Conclusions.—: </strong>Poorly named laboratory tests are a significant source of provider confusion, and tests that are named according to the authors' naming rules as outlined in this article have the potential to improve test ordering and correct interpretation of results. Consensus among provider groups indicates that a single yet clear naming strategy for laboratory tests is achievable.</p>","PeriodicalId":8305,"journal":{"name":"Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Laboratory Test Names Matter: A Survey on What Works and What Doesn't Work for Orders and Results.\",\"authors\":\"Alexis B Carter, Andrea L Berger, Richard Schreiber\",\"doi\":\"10.5858/arpa.2021-0314-OA\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context.—: </strong>Health care providers were surveyed to determine their ability to correctly decipher laboratory test names and their preferences for laboratory test names and result displays.</p><p><strong>Objective.—: </strong>To confirm principles for laboratory test nomenclature and display and to compare and contrast the abilities and preferences of different provider groups for laboratory test names.</p><p><strong>Design.—: </strong>Health care providers across different specialties and perspectives completed a survey of 38 questions, which included participant demographics, real-life examples of poorly named laboratory orders that they were asked to decipher, an assessment of vitamin D test name knowledge, their preferences for ideal names for tests, and their preferred display for test results. Participants were grouped and compared by profession, level of training, and the presence or absence of specialization in informatics and/or laboratory medicine.</p><p><strong>Results.—: </strong>Participants struggled with poorly named tests, especially with less commonly ordered tests. Participants' knowledge of vitamin D analyte names was poor and consistent with prior published studies. The most commonly selected ideal names correlated positively with the percentage of the authors' previously developed naming rules (R = 0.54, P < .001). There was strong consensus across groups for the best result display.</p><p><strong>Conclusions.—: </strong>Poorly named laboratory tests are a significant source of provider confusion, and tests that are named according to the authors' naming rules as outlined in this article have the potential to improve test ordering and correct interpretation of results. Consensus among provider groups indicates that a single yet clear naming strategy for laboratory tests is achievable.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8305,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2021-0314-OA\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2021-0314-OA","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景对医疗服务提供者进行调查,以确定他们正确解读实验室检验名称的能力以及他们对实验室检验名称和结果显示的偏好:确认实验室检验命名和显示的原则,并比较和对比不同医疗服务提供者群体对实验室检验名称的能力和偏好:设计--:不同专业和视角的医疗服务提供者完成了一项包含 38 个问题的调查,其中包括参与者的人口统计学特征、要求他们破译的命名不当的化验单的真实案例、维生素 D 检验名称知识评估、他们对理想检验名称的偏好以及他们对检验结果显示的偏好。根据参与者的职业、培训水平以及是否专攻信息学和/或检验医学,对他们进行了分组和比较:结果--:参与者对命名不清的检验项目感到头疼,尤其是不常用的检验项目。参与者对维生素 D 分析物名称的了解较少,这与之前发表的研究结果一致。最常选择的理想名称与作者之前制定的命名规则的百分比呈正相关(R = 0.54,P < .001)。各小组在最佳结果显示方面达成了强烈共识:实验室化验项目命名不当是造成医疗服务提供者混淆的一个重要原因,而根据本文中概述的作者命名规则命名的化验项目有可能改善化验单的排序和结果的正确解释。医疗服务提供者群体的共识表明,为实验室检验项目制定一个单一而清晰的命名策略是可以实现的。
Laboratory Test Names Matter: A Survey on What Works and What Doesn't Work for Orders and Results.
Context.—: Health care providers were surveyed to determine their ability to correctly decipher laboratory test names and their preferences for laboratory test names and result displays.
Objective.—: To confirm principles for laboratory test nomenclature and display and to compare and contrast the abilities and preferences of different provider groups for laboratory test names.
Design.—: Health care providers across different specialties and perspectives completed a survey of 38 questions, which included participant demographics, real-life examples of poorly named laboratory orders that they were asked to decipher, an assessment of vitamin D test name knowledge, their preferences for ideal names for tests, and their preferred display for test results. Participants were grouped and compared by profession, level of training, and the presence or absence of specialization in informatics and/or laboratory medicine.
Results.—: Participants struggled with poorly named tests, especially with less commonly ordered tests. Participants' knowledge of vitamin D analyte names was poor and consistent with prior published studies. The most commonly selected ideal names correlated positively with the percentage of the authors' previously developed naming rules (R = 0.54, P < .001). There was strong consensus across groups for the best result display.
Conclusions.—: Poorly named laboratory tests are a significant source of provider confusion, and tests that are named according to the authors' naming rules as outlined in this article have the potential to improve test ordering and correct interpretation of results. Consensus among provider groups indicates that a single yet clear naming strategy for laboratory tests is achievable.
期刊介绍:
Welcome to the website of the Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine (APLM). This monthly, peer-reviewed journal of the College of American Pathologists offers global reach and highest measured readership among pathology journals.
Published since 1926, ARCHIVES was voted in 2009 the only pathology journal among the top 100 most influential journals of the past 100 years by the BioMedical and Life Sciences Division of the Special Libraries Association. Online access to the full-text and PDF files of APLM articles is free.