Laboratory Test Names Matter: A Survey on What Works and What Doesn’t Work for Orders and Results

Author:

Carter Alexis B.1,Berger Andrea L.2,Schreiber Richard3

Affiliation:

1. From the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta, Atlanta, Georgia (Carter)

2. the Department of Population Health Sciences, Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, Pennsylvania (Berger)

3. the Department of Medicine and Information Services, Penn State Health Holy Spirit Medical Center, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania (Schreiber)

Abstract

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.

Publisher

Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

Subject

Medical Laboratory Technology,General Medicine,Pathology and Forensic Medicine

Reference50 articles.

1. Primary care physicians’ challenges in ordering clinical laboratory tests and interpreting results;Hickner;J Am Board Fam Med,2014

2. Decoding laboratory test names: a major challenge to appropriate patient care;Passiment;J Gen Intern Med,2013

3. Standardizing clinical laboratory data for secondary use;Abhyankar;J Biomed Inform,2012

4. Codes and names of clinical laboratory tests and shared interlaboratory databases [in Japanese];Inoue;Rinsho Byori,1997

5. The significance of a usability evaluation of an emerging laboratory order entry system;Peute;Int J Med Inform,2007

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