Centre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Faculty of Medicine, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia.
J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Oct;27(10):1334-48. doi: 10.1007/s11606-011-1949-5. Epub 2011 Dec 20.
Serious lapses in patient care result from failure to follow-up test results.
To systematically review evidence quantifying the extent of failure to follow-up test results and the impact for ambulatory patients.
Medline, CINAHL, Embase, Inspec and the Cochrane Database were searched for English-language literature from 1995 to 2010.
Studies which provided documented quantitative evidence of the number of tests not followed up for patients attending ambulatory settings including: outpatient clinics, academic medical or community health centres, or primary care practices.
Four reviewers independently screened 768 articles.
Nineteen studies met the inclusion criteria and reported wide variation in the extent of tests not followed-up: 6.8% (79/1163) to 62% (125/202) for laboratory tests; 1.0% (4/395) to 35.7% (45/126) for radiology. The impact on patient outcomes included missed cancer diagnoses. Test management practices varied between settings with many individuals involved in the process. There were few guidelines regarding responsibility for patient notification and follow-up. Quantitative evidence of the effectiveness of electronic test management systems was limited although there was a general trend towards improved test follow-up when electronic systems were used.
Most studies used medical record reviews; hence evidence of follow-up action relied upon documentation in the medical record. All studies were conducted in the US so care should be taken in generalising findings to other countries.
Failure to follow-up test results is an important safety concern which requires urgent attention. Solutions should be multifaceted and include: policies relating to responsibility, timing and process of notification; integrated information and communication technologies facilitating communication; and consideration of the multidisciplinary nature of the process and the role of the patient. It is essential that evaluations of interventions are undertaken and solutions integrated into the work and context of ambulatory care delivery.
患者护理中的严重失误是由于未能跟进检测结果导致的。
系统回顾量化未能跟进门诊患者检测结果的程度及其影响的证据。
从 1995 年至 2010 年,在 Medline、CINAHL、Embase、Inspec 和 Cochrane 数据库中搜索了英文文献。
纳入了为门诊环境(包括门诊、学术医疗或社区卫生中心或初级保健诊所)就诊的患者提供记录了未跟进检测数量的定量证据的研究。
四位审阅者独立筛选了 768 篇文章。
19 项研究符合纳入标准,并报告了未跟进检测的范围存在很大差异:实验室检测为 6.8%(79/1163)至 62%(125/202);影像学检查为 1.0%(4/395)至 35.7%(45/126)。对患者结局的影响包括漏诊癌症。检测管理实践在各机构之间存在差异,许多人参与了该过程。关于通知和随访患者的责任,几乎没有指南。尽管电子检测管理系统在使用时通常可以提高检测的跟进程度,但关于其有效性的定量证据有限。
大多数研究使用病历回顾;因此,随访行动的证据依赖于病历中的记录。所有研究均在美国进行,因此在将研究结果推广到其他国家时应谨慎。
未能跟进检测结果是一个重要的安全问题,需要紧急关注。解决方案应该是多方面的,包括:与责任、通知的时间和流程相关的政策;促进沟通的信息和通信技术的整合;以及考虑该过程的多学科性质和患者的作用。评估干预措施并将解决方案整合到门诊护理服务的工作和环境中是至关重要的。