Clustered interventions to reduce inappropriate duplicate laboratory tests in an Irish tertiary hospital

Redundant laboratory testing on referral from general practice to the outpatient clinic: a post-hoc analysis

Background

Inappropriately repeated laboratory testing is a commonly occurring problem. However, this has not been studied extensively in the outpatient clinic after referral by GPs.

Aim

The aim of this study was to investigate how often laboratory tests ordered by the GP were repeated on referral to the outpatient clinic, and how many of the normal test results remained normal on repetition.

Design & setting

This is a post-hoc analysis of a study on laboratory testing strategies in patients newly referred to the outpatient clinic between April 2015 and April 2017.

Method

All patients who had a referral letter including laboratory test results ordered by the GP were included. These results were compared with the laboratory test results ordered in the outpatient clinic.

Results

Data were available for 295 patients, 191 of which had post-visit testing done. In this group, 56% of tests ordered by the GP were repeated. Tests with abnormal results were repeated more frequently than tests with normal results (65% versus 53%; P<0.001). A longer test interval was associated with slightly smaller odds of tests being repeated (odds ratio [OR] 0.97, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.95 to 0.99; P = 0.003). Of the tests with normal test results that were repeated, 90% remained normal. This was independent of testing interval or testing strategy.

Conclusion

Laboratory tests ordered by the GP are commonly repeated on referral to the outpatient clinic. The number of test results remaining normal on repetition suggests a high level of redundancy in laboratory test repetition.

A systematic literature review on unnecessary diagnostic testing: The role of ICT use

BACKGROUND

The negative impact of unnecessary diagnostic tests on healthcare systems and patients has been widely recognized. Medical researchers in various countries have been devoting effort to reduce unnecessary diagnostic tests by using different types of interventions, including information and communications technology-based (ICT-based) intervention, educational intervention, audit and feedback, the introduction of guidelines or protocols, and the reward and punishment of staff. We conducted a review of ICT based interventions and a comparative analysis of their relative effectiveness in reducing unnecessary tests.

METHOD

A systematic Boolean search in PubMed, EMBase and EBSCOhost research databases was performed. Keyword search and citation analysis were also conducted. Empirical studies reporting ICT based interventions, and their implications on relative effectiveness in reducing unnecessary diagnostic tests (pathology tests or medical imaging) were evaluated independently by two reviewers based on a rigorously developed coding protocol.

RESULTS

92 research articles from peer-reviewed journals were identified as eligible. 47 studies involved a single-method intervention and 45 involved multi-method interventions. Regardless of the number of interventions involved in the studies, ICT-based interventions were utilized by 71 studies and 59 of them were shown to be effective in reducing unnecessary testing. A clinical decision support (CDS) tool appeared to be the most adopted ICT approach, with 46 out of 71 studies using CDS tools. The CDS tool showed effectiveness in reducing test volume in 38 studies and reducing cost in 24 studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This review investigated five frequently utilized intervention methods, ICT-based, education, introduction of guidelines or protocols, audit and feedback, and reward and punishment. It provides in-depth analysis of the efficacy of different types of interventions and sheds insights about the benefits of ICT based interventions, especially those utilising CDS tools, to reduce unnecessary diagnostic testing. The replicability of the studies is limited due to the heterogeneity of the studies in terms of context, study design, and targeted types of tests.

Minimum retesting intervals in practice: 10 years experience

Background

Minimum retesting intervals (MRI) are a popular demand management solution for the identification and reduction of over-utilized tests. In 2011 Association of Clinical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicines (ACB) published evidence-based recommendations for the use of MRI.

Aim

The aim of the paper was to review the use of MRI over the period since the introduction of these recommendations in 2011 to 2020 and compare it to previous published data between 2000-2010.

Methods

A multi-source literature search was performed to identify studies that reported the use of a MRI in the management or identification of inappropriate testing between the years prior to (2000–2010) and after implementation (2011–2020) of these recommendations.

Results

31 studies were identified which met the acceptance criteria (2000–2010 n=4, 2011–2020 n=27). Between 2000 and 2010 4.6% of tests (203,104/4,425,311) were identified as failing a defined MRI which rose to 11.8% of tests (2,691,591/22,777,288) in the 2011–2020 period. For those studies between 2011 and 2020 reporting predicted savings (n=20), 14.3% of tests (1,079,972/750,580) were cancelled, representing a total saving of 2.9 M Euros or 2.77 Euro/test. The most popular rejected test was Haemoglobin A1c which accounted for nearly a quarter of the total number of rejected tests. 13 out 27 studies used the ACB recommendations.

Conclusions

MRI are now an established, safe and sustainable demand management tool for the identification and management of inappropriate testing. Evidence based consensus recommendations have supported the adoption of this demand management tool into practice across multiple healthcare settings globally and harmonizing laboratory practice.