ArticleBMJ quality & safety2015
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.
Article in BMJ quality & safety, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 3 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
31 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Communicating blood test results in primary care: a mixed-methods systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Pooled it
- Stakeholders' perceptions and experiences of factors influencing the commissioning, delivery, and uptake of general health checks: a qualitative evidence synthesis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Impact of the clinically oriented roles of a general practice receptionist: a systematic review with narrative synthesis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Pooled it
- Mapping policies, regulations, and practice supports for medical office assistants in primary care: a scoping review.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Lithium Point-of-Care Testing to Improve Adherence to Monitoring Guidelines and Quality of Maintenance Therapy: Protocol for a Randomised Feasibility Trial.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Evaluation of specimen rejection rates in the preanalytical phase and nurses' experiences: a mixed design study.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Interventions to improve timely cancer diagnosis: an integrative review.Diagnosis (Berlin, Germany) · 2025Review
- Improving the primary care clinical testing process in southwest Scotland: a systems-based approach.BMJ open quality · 2024Article
- Patient safety in actioning and communicating blood test results in primary care: a UK wide audit using the Primary care Academic CollaboraTive (PACT).BMJ open quality · 2024Article
- Enhancing access to primary care is critical to the future of an equitable health service: using process visualisation to understand the impact of national policy in the UK.Frontiers in health services · 2024Article
- Delays in Blood Work and Disease Burden: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Unmet Blood Work Need and Seven Key Health Conditions Across 21 Countries.International journal of public health · 2024Article
- Blood test result communication in primary care: mixed-methods systematic review protocol.BJGP open · 2023Article
- Computational Modeling as a Tool to Drive the Development of a Novel, Chemical Device for Monitoring the Injured Brain and Body.ACS chemical neuroscience · 2023Article
- Why Test study protocol: a UK-wide audit using the Primary Care Academic CollaboraTive (PACT) to explore the reasons for primary care testing.BJGP open · 2022Article
- Enhancing referral processes within an integrated fall prevention pathway for older people: a mixed-methods study.BMJ open · 2022Article
- 'I guess I'll wait to hear'- communication of blood test results in primary care a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022Article
- Can patients contribute to enhancing the safety and effectiveness of test-result follow-up? Qualitative outcomes from a health consumer workshop.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Article
- Article
- A quantitative assessment of the parameters of the role of receptionists in modern primary care using the work design framework.BMC family practice · 2020Article
- Never Events in UK General Practice: A Survey of the Views of General Practitioners on Their Frequency and Acceptability as a Safety Improvement Approach.Journal of patient safety · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe testing and result communication process in primary care is complex. Its successful completion relies on the coordinated efforts of a range of staff in primary care and external settings working together with patients. Despite the importance of diagnostic testing in provision of care, this complexity renders the process vulnerable in the face of increasing demand, stretched resources and a lack of supporting guidance.
methodsWe conducted a series of focus groups with patients and staff across four primary care practices using process-improvement strategies to identify and understand areas where either unnecessary delay is introduced, or the process may fail entirely. We then worked with both patients and staff to arrive at practical strategies to improve the current system.
resultsA total of six areas across the process were identified where improvements could be introduced. These were: (1) delay in phlebotomy, (2) lack of a fail-safe to ensure blood tests are returned to practices and patients, (3) difficulties in accessing results by telephone, (4) role of non-clinical staff in communicating results, (5) routine communication of normal results and (6) lack of a protocol for result communication.
conclusionsA number of potential failures in testing and communicating results to patients were identified, and some specific ideas for improving existing systems emerged. These included same-day phlebotomy sessions, use of modern technology methods to proactively communicate routine results and targeted training for receptionists handling sensitive data. There remains an urgent need for further work to test these and other potential solutions.
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.