Ayinbuomwan E, Onovughakpo-Sakpa E O
Department of Chemical Pathology, University of Benin, Benin City, Edo State, Nigeria.
Niger J Clin Pract. 2016 May-Jun;19(3):323-6. doi: 10.4103/1119-3077.179282.
Investigation results traditionally are given in two parts: Investigation results and report. When both are provided for a test done, reports offer in depth information, explanation and clarification of results. This trend has been lost over time as results are the only documentation routinely given currently in conventional hospital practice except reports are specially requested for although the service is obtainable at no extra cost to the patient or attending physician.
To access the necessity of laboratory report as part of investigation results and reasons for non utilization of laboratory report services by physicians.
A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted amongst doctors of varying cadres in 3 specialties (Physician, Surgeon, Gender practitioners) at the University of Benin Teaching Hospital, Benin City, Nigeria. Data was collected from 121 participating doctors using a structured 19 item self administered questionnaire. The data was analyzed using IBM-SPSS Version 20.0.
Most respondents agreed that the investigation results currently obtained from the laboratory were useful but would be better if laboratory reports accompanied them. Over 70% of the doctors noted that the above sometimes held true only sometimes and not always as stated by 28.1% of doctors. More than 90% of the doctors have knowledge of the difference between laboratory results and report; the necessity of a lab physician's report for every investigation requested for and its potential benefits such an investigation reporting system will have on patient management. Although most doctors (81.8%) discuss laboratory results with lab physicians, they do not routinely consult them to achieve the improved value of investigation results until a critical period of necessity arises.
Laboratory investigations would offer doctors more information, which translates to enhanced patient care if investigation results are mandatorily accompanied by a laboratory report.
传统上，调查结果分为两部分给出：调查结果和报告。当针对一项检查同时提供这两部分内容时，报告能提供关于结果的深入信息、解释和说明。随着时间的推移，这种趋势已经消失，因为在传统医院实践中，目前通常仅提供结果作为唯一的文档记录，除非特别要求，否则报告不会提供，尽管这项服务对患者或主治医生无需额外付费即可获得。
探讨实验室报告作为调查结果一部分的必要性以及医生不使用实验室报告服务的原因。
在尼日利亚贝宁城贝宁大学教学医院，对3个专业（内科医生、外科医生、妇产科医生）不同级别的医生进行了一项描述性横断面研究。使用一份包含19个项目的结构化自填问卷从121名参与的医生那里收集数据。数据使用IBM-SPSS 20.0版本进行分析。
大多数受访者认为目前从实验室获得的调查结果是有用的，但如果有实验室报告伴随则会更好。超过70%的医生指出上述情况有时成立，但并非如28.1%的医生所说总是如此。超过90%的医生了解实验室结果和报告之间的差异；对于每项所要求的检查都需要实验室医生报告的必要性以及这样一个调查报告系统对患者管理可能带来的益处。尽管大多数医生（81.8%）会与实验室医生讨论实验室结果，但他们不会常规地咨询实验室医生以实现调查结果的更高价值，直到出现关键的必要时期。
如果调查结果强制附有实验室报告，实验室检查将为医生提供更多信息，从而转化为更好的患者护理。
