Critical review of laboratory investigations in clinical practice guidelines: proposals for the description of investigation

Author:

Aakre Kristin M.1,Langlois Michel R.2,Watine Joseph2,Barth Julian H.2,Baum Hannsjörg3,Collinson Paul4,Laitinen Païvi1,Oosterhuis Wytze P.1

Affiliation:

1. Laboratory of Clinical Biochemistry, Haukeland University Hospital, 5021 Bergen, Norway,

2. The European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine and European Union of Medical Specialists joint working group on Guidelines

3. Institute for Laboratory Medicine, Blutdepot und Krankenhaushygiene, Regionale Kliniken Holding RKH GmbH , Ludwigsburg , Germany

4. The European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine working group on Cardiac markers

Abstract

Abstract Background: Correct information provided by guidelines may reduce laboratory test related errors during the pre-analytical, analytical and post-analytical phase and increase the quality of laboratory results. Methods: Twelve clinical practice guidelines were reviewed regarding inclusion of important laboratory investigations. Based on the results and the authors’ experience, two checklists were developed: one comprehensive list including topics that authors of guidelines may consider and one consisting of minimal standards that should be covered for all laboratory tests recommended in clinical practice guidelines. The number of topics addressed by the guidelines was related to involvement of laboratory medicine specialists in the guideline development process. Results: The comprehensive list suggests 33 pre- analytical, 37 analytical and 10 post-analytical items. The mean percentage of topics dealt with by the guidelines was 33% (median 30%, range 17%–55%) and inclusion of a laboratory medicine specialist in the guideline committee significantly increased the number of topics addressed. Information about patient status, biological and analytical interferences and sample handling were scarce in most guidelines even if the inclusion of a laboratory medicine specialist in the development process seemingly led to increased focus on, e.g., sample type, sample handling and analytical variation. Examples underlining the importance of including laboratory items are given. Conclusions: Inclusion of laboratory medicine specialist in the guideline development process may increase the focus on important laboratory related items even if this information is usually limited. Two checklists are suggested to help guideline developers to cover all important topics related to laboratory testing.

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Subject

Biochemistry (medical),Clinical Biochemistry,General Medicine

Reference28 articles.

1. Department of Health Pathology Modernization Team. Modernising Pathology Services (http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/@dh/@en/documents/digitalasset/dh_4073112.pdf). Accessed 27 August, 2012.

2. Hallworth MJ. The ‘70% claim’: what is the evidence base? Ann Clin Biochem 2011;48:487–8.10.1258/acb.2011.011177http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=000297489700002&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=b7bc2757938ac7a7a821505f8243d9f3

3. Plebani M. Exploring the iceberg of errors in laboratory medicine. Clin Chim Acta 2009;404:16–23.http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=000267005800005&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=b7bc2757938ac7a7a821505f8243d9f3

4. Lapworth R, Tarn AC. Commentary on the British Thoracic Society guidelines for the investigation of unilateral pleural effusion in adults. Ann Clin Biochem 2006;43:17–22.10.1258/00045630677514178616390605

5. Miyakis S, Lockshin MD, Atsumi T, Branch DW, Brey RL, Cervera R, et al. International consensus statement on an update of the classification criteria for definite antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). J Thromb Haemost 2006;4:295–306.16420554

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3