Smellie W S, Murphy M J, Galloway P J, Hinnie J, McIlroy J, Dryburgh F J
Institute of Biochemistry, Glasgow Royal Infirmary.
J Clin Pathol. 1995 Dec;48(12):1126-9. doi: 10.1136/jcp.48.12.1126.
To examine a model for the evaluation of appropriateness of testing in an emergency biochemistry laboratory.
A model was devised in which incoming emergency test requests were categorised as appropriate or inappropriate. Explicit criteria were used to define eight minor categories, which were chosen to reflect accurately current working practice within the hospital and laboratory. Five junior medical staff each undertook a prospective 24 hour assessment, during which time all incoming requests were monitored and categorised according to these criteria. Concordance between monitors was evaluated before and during assessments.
Of 509 requests, 384 (75%) were appropriate and 125 (25%) were inappropriate according to the criteria used to define categories. Inappropriate requests fell into three main groups: preoperative samples (43.2% (54/125) of all inappropriate requests), missed routine samples (33.6% (42/125)) and accelerated (priority) analyses (16% (20/125)). Various other reasons accounted for the remaining 7.2% (9/125).
This model may be used to obtain valid information about current clinical and laboratory practice. Strategies to reduce the number of inappropriate requests have been identified in order to reserve the emergency service for situations of true need.
研究一种用于评估急诊生化实验室检测适宜性的模型。
设计了一个模型,将收到的急诊检测申请分为适宜或不适宜两类。使用明确的标准定义了八个小类别,这些类别旨在准确反映医院和实验室当前的工作实践。五名初级医务人员每人进行了一次为期24小时的前瞻性评估,在此期间,根据这些标准对所有收到的申请进行监测和分类。在评估前和评估期间对监测人员之间的一致性进行了评估。
根据用于定义类别的标准,在509份申请中,384份(75%)适宜,125份(25%)不适宜。不适宜的申请主要分为三组:术前样本(占所有不适宜申请的43.2%(54/125))、遗漏的常规样本(33.6%(42/125))和加急(优先)分析(16%(20/125))。其他各种原因占其余的7.2%(9/125)。
该模型可用于获取有关当前临床和实验室实践的有效信息。已确定减少不适宜申请数量的策略,以便将急诊服务保留给真正有需要的情况。