A prospective tool for risk assessment of sendout testing

Bonnie Cole, Jane A. Dickerson, Mark L. Graber, Corinne R. Fantz, Michael Laposata, Kerm Henriksen, Michael L. Astion, Paul Epner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: Errors associated with laboratory testing can cause significant patient harm. Sendout testing refers to tests sent by a primary lab to a reference lab when testing is unavailable at the primary lab. Sendout testing is particularly high risk for patient harm, due to many factors including increased hand-offs, manual processes, and complexity associated with rare, low-volume tests. No published prospective tools exist for sendout risk assessment. Methods: A novel prospective tool was developed to assess risk of diagnostic errors involving laboratory sendout testing. This tool was successfully piloted at nine sites. Results: Marked diversity was noted among survey respondents, particularly in the sections on quality metrics and utilization management. Of note, most sites had committees who managed rules for test ordering, but few places reported enforcing these rules. Only one site claimed to routinely measure the frequency clinicians failed to retrieve test results. An evaluation of the tool indicated that it was both useful and easy to use. Conclusions: This tool could be used by other laboratories to identify the areas of highest risk to patients, which in turn may guide them in focusing their quality improvement efforts and resources.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1-5
Number of pages5
JournalClinica Chimica Acta
Volume434
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Risk assessment
Patient Harm
Testing
Quality Improvement
Diagnostic Errors
Hand
Surveys and Questionnaires

Keywords

  • Errors
  • Laboratory risk
  • Reference laboratory
  • Referral laboratory
  • Risk assessment tool
  • Sendout

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biochemistry
  • Clinical Biochemistry
  • Biochemistry, medical
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Cole, B., Dickerson, J. A., Graber, M. L., Fantz, C. R., Laposata, M., Henriksen, K., ... Epner, P. (2014). A prospective tool for risk assessment of sendout testing. Clinica Chimica Acta, 434, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2014.03.028

A prospective tool for risk assessment of sendout testing. / Cole, Bonnie; Dickerson, Jane A.; Graber, Mark L.; Fantz, Corinne R.; Laposata, Michael; Henriksen, Kerm; Astion, Michael L.; Epner, Paul.

In: Clinica Chimica Acta, Vol. 434, 01.07.2014, p. 1-5.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Cole, B, Dickerson, JA, Graber, ML, Fantz, CR, Laposata, M, Henriksen, K, Astion, ML & Epner, P 2014, 'A prospective tool for risk assessment of sendout testing', Clinica Chimica Acta, vol. 434, pp. 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2014.03.028
Cole, Bonnie ; Dickerson, Jane A. ; Graber, Mark L. ; Fantz, Corinne R. ; Laposata, Michael ; Henriksen, Kerm ; Astion, Michael L. ; Epner, Paul. / A prospective tool for risk assessment of sendout testing. In: Clinica Chimica Acta. 2014 ; Vol. 434. pp. 1-5.
@article{fa6b65145f36441e84bacf8eba701a83,
title = "A prospective tool for risk assessment of sendout testing",
abstract = "Objective: Errors associated with laboratory testing can cause significant patient harm. Sendout testing refers to tests sent by a primary lab to a reference lab when testing is unavailable at the primary lab. Sendout testing is particularly high risk for patient harm, due to many factors including increased hand-offs, manual processes, and complexity associated with rare, low-volume tests. No published prospective tools exist for sendout risk assessment. Methods: A novel prospective tool was developed to assess risk of diagnostic errors involving laboratory sendout testing. This tool was successfully piloted at nine sites. Results: Marked diversity was noted among survey respondents, particularly in the sections on quality metrics and utilization management. Of note, most sites had committees who managed rules for test ordering, but few places reported enforcing these rules. Only one site claimed to routinely measure the frequency clinicians failed to retrieve test results. An evaluation of the tool indicated that it was both useful and easy to use. Conclusions: This tool could be used by other laboratories to identify the areas of highest risk to patients, which in turn may guide them in focusing their quality improvement efforts and resources.",
keywords = "Errors, Laboratory risk, Reference laboratory, Referral laboratory, Risk assessment tool, Sendout",
author = "Bonnie Cole and Dickerson, {Jane A.} and Graber, {Mark L.} and Fantz, {Corinne R.} and Michael Laposata and Kerm Henriksen and Astion, {Michael L.} and Paul Epner",
year = "2014",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.cca.2014.03.028",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "434",
pages = "1--5",
journal = "Clinica Chimica Acta",
issn = "0009-8981",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A prospective tool for risk assessment of sendout testing

AU - Cole, Bonnie

AU - Dickerson, Jane A.

AU - Graber, Mark L.

AU - Fantz, Corinne R.

AU - Laposata, Michael

AU - Henriksen, Kerm

AU - Astion, Michael L.

AU - Epner, Paul

PY - 2014/7/1

Y1 - 2014/7/1

N2 - Objective: Errors associated with laboratory testing can cause significant patient harm. Sendout testing refers to tests sent by a primary lab to a reference lab when testing is unavailable at the primary lab. Sendout testing is particularly high risk for patient harm, due to many factors including increased hand-offs, manual processes, and complexity associated with rare, low-volume tests. No published prospective tools exist for sendout risk assessment. Methods: A novel prospective tool was developed to assess risk of diagnostic errors involving laboratory sendout testing. This tool was successfully piloted at nine sites. Results: Marked diversity was noted among survey respondents, particularly in the sections on quality metrics and utilization management. Of note, most sites had committees who managed rules for test ordering, but few places reported enforcing these rules. Only one site claimed to routinely measure the frequency clinicians failed to retrieve test results. An evaluation of the tool indicated that it was both useful and easy to use. Conclusions: This tool could be used by other laboratories to identify the areas of highest risk to patients, which in turn may guide them in focusing their quality improvement efforts and resources.

AB - Objective: Errors associated with laboratory testing can cause significant patient harm. Sendout testing refers to tests sent by a primary lab to a reference lab when testing is unavailable at the primary lab. Sendout testing is particularly high risk for patient harm, due to many factors including increased hand-offs, manual processes, and complexity associated with rare, low-volume tests. No published prospective tools exist for sendout risk assessment. Methods: A novel prospective tool was developed to assess risk of diagnostic errors involving laboratory sendout testing. This tool was successfully piloted at nine sites. Results: Marked diversity was noted among survey respondents, particularly in the sections on quality metrics and utilization management. Of note, most sites had committees who managed rules for test ordering, but few places reported enforcing these rules. Only one site claimed to routinely measure the frequency clinicians failed to retrieve test results. An evaluation of the tool indicated that it was both useful and easy to use. Conclusions: This tool could be used by other laboratories to identify the areas of highest risk to patients, which in turn may guide them in focusing their quality improvement efforts and resources.

KW - Errors

KW - Laboratory risk

KW - Reference laboratory

KW - Referral laboratory

KW - Risk assessment tool

KW - Sendout

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84899548746&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84899548746&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.cca.2014.03.028

DO - 10.1016/j.cca.2014.03.028

M3 - Article

VL - 434

SP - 1

EP - 5

JO - Clinica Chimica Acta

JF - Clinica Chimica Acta

SN - 0009-8981

ER -