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

Author:

Schroeder Lee F.1ORCID,Rebman Paul2,Kasaie Parastu2ORCID,Kenu Ernest3,Zelner Jon45,Dowdy David W.2

Affiliation:

1. Department of Pathology, University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

2. Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA

3. School of Public Health, University of Ghana, Ghana

4. Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

5. Center for Social Epidemiology and Population Health, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

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.

Funder

national institute of allergy and infectious diseases

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Reference44 articles.

1. Bringing Data Analytics to the Design of Optimized Diagnostic Networks in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Process, Terms and Definitions

2. World Health Organization Regional Committee for Africa. The Maputo Declaration on Strengthening of Laboratory Systems. 2008. https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/the-maputo-declaration-on-strengthening-oflaboratory-systems

3. Practical recommendations for strengthening national and regional laboratory networks in Africa in the Global Health Security era

4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The laboratory response network partners in preparedness. Available from: https://emergency.cdc.gov/lrn/index.asp. [Accessed 9 June, 2022].

5. Leveraging the Laboratory Response Network Model for the Global Health Security Agenda

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