ArticleAnnals of family medicine
Management of test results in family medicine offices.
Article in Annals of family medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of health information technology on the management and follow-up of test results - a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2019Pooled it
- Failure to follow-up test results for ambulatory patients: a systematic review.Journal of general internal medicine · 2012Pooled it
- Design and Evaluation of an Electronic Information Exchange System Connecting Laboratories and Physicians' Offices.Perspectives in health information managemen · 2022Article
- Association of the Usability of Electronic Health Records With Cognitive Workload and Performance Levels Among Physicians.JAMA network open · 2019Article
- Test Result Management Practices of Canadian Internal Medicine Physicians and Trainees.Journal of general internal medicine · 2019Article
- Primary care provider perceptions of enablers and barriers to following guideline-recommended laboratory tests to confirm chronic kidney disease: a qualitative descriptive study.BMC family practice · 2018Article
- Communicating laboratory results through a Web site: Patients' priorities and viewpoints.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2018Article
- Clinician Perspectives on the Management of Abnormal Subcritical Tests in an Urban Academic Safety-Net Health Care System.Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety · 2017Article
- Adaption, implementation and evaluation of collaborative service improvements in the testing and result communication process in primary care from patient and staff perspectives: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- The role of informal dimensions of safety in high-volume organisational routines: an ethnographic study of test results handling in UK general practice.Implementation science : IS · 2017Article
- Workarounds and Test Results Follow-up in Electronic Health Record-Based Primary Care.Applied clinical informatics · 2016Article
- Article
- Routine failures in the process for blood testing and the communication of results to patients in primary care in the UK: a qualitative exploration of patient and provider perspectives.BMJ quality & safety · 2015Article
- Test result communication in primary care: a survey of current practice.BMJ quality & safety · 2015Article
- Good practice statements on safe laboratory testing: A mixed methods study by the LINNEAUS collaboration on patient safety in primary care.The European journal of general practice · 2015Article
- Patient perspectives on test result communication in primary care: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2015Article
- The Impact for Patient Outcomes of Failure to Follow Up on Test Results. How Can We Do Better?EJIFCC · 2015Article
- Blame the Patient, Blame the Doctor or Blame the System? A Meta-Synthesis of Qualitative Studies of Patient Safety in Primary Care.PloS one · 2015Article
- Test result communication in primary care: clinical and office staff perspectives.Family practice · 2014Article
- Developing a preliminary 'never event' list for general practice using consensus-building methods.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe wanted to explore test results management systems in family medicine offices and to delineate the components of quality in results management.
methodsUsing a multimethod protocol, we intensively studied 4 purposefully chosen family medicine offices using observations, interviews, and surveys. Data analysis consisted of iterative qualitative analysis, descriptive frequencies, and individual case studies, followed by a comparative case analysis. We assessed the quality of results management at each practice by both the presence of and adherence to systemwide practices for each results management step, as well as outcomes from chart reviews, patient surveys, and interview and observation notes.
resultsWe found variability between offices in how they performed the tasks for each of the specific steps of results management. No office consistently had or adhered to office-wide results management practices, and only 2 offices had written protocols or procedures for any results management steps. Whereas most patients surveyed acknowledged receiving their test results (87% to 100%), a far smaller proportion of patient charts documented patient notification (58% to 85%), clinician response to the result (47% to 84%), and follow-up for abnormal results (28% to 55%). We found 2 themes that emerged as factors of importance in assessing test results management quality: safety awareness-a leadership focus and communication that occurs around quality and safety, teamwork in the office, and the presence of appropriate policies and procedures; and technological adoption-the presence of an electronic health record, digital connections between the office and testing facilities, use of technology to facilitate patient communication, and the presence of forcing functions (built-in safeguards and requirements).
conclusionUnderstanding the components of safety awareness and technological adoption can assist family medicine offices in evaluating their own results management processes and help them design systems that can lead to higher quality care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.