Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29489926›Full record

ReviewJournal of hospital medicine2018

Interventions to Improve Follow-Up of Laboratory Test Results Pending at Discharge: A Systematic Review.

Nedra S Whitehead, Laurina Williams, Sreelatha Meleth, Sara Kennedy, Paul Epner, Hardeep Singh, Kathleene Wooldridge, Anuj K Dalal, Stacy E Walz, Tom Lorey and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of hospital medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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 · 2021
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Ambulatory Safety Nets to Reduce Missed and Delayed Diagnoses of Cancer.Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety · 2019
    Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Nedra S WhiteheadRTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Laurina WilliamsCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Sreelatha MelethRTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Sara KennedyRTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Paul EpnerPaul Epner, LLC, Evanston, Illinois.
Hardeep SinghCenter for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
Kathleene WooldridgeVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Anuj K DalalBrigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Stacy E WalzArkansas State University, Jonesboro, Arkansas.
Tom LoreyKaiser Permanente Northern California, Berkeley, California.
Mark L GraberRTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

Funding

CDC HHS 200-2014-F-61251Division of Laboratory SystemsHouston VA HSR&D Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness, and Safety CIN 13-413Intramural CDC HHS CC999999Macy Foundation to develop a curriculum on diagnostic errors
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Failure to follow up test results pending at discharge (TPAD) from hospitals or emergency departments is a major patient safety concern. The purpose of this review is to systematically evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to improve follow-up of laboratory TPAD. We conducted literature searches in PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, and EMBASE using search terms for relevant health care settings, transition of patient care, laboratory tests, communication, and pending or missed tests. We solicited unpublished studies from the clinical laboratory community and excluded articles that did not address transitions between settings, did not include an intervention, or were not related to laboratory TPAD. We also excluded letters, editorials, commentaries, abstracts, case reports, and case series. Of the 9,592 abstracts retrieved, eight met the inclusion criteria and reported the successful communication of TPAD. A team member abstracted predetermined data elements from each study, and a senior scientist reviewed the abstraction. Two experienced reviewers independently appraised the quality of each study using published Laboratory Medicine Best Practices (LMBP™) A-6 scoring criteria. We assessed the body of evidence using the A-6 methodology, and the evidence suggested that electronic tools or one-on-one education increased documentation of pending tests in discharge summaries. We also found that automated notifications improved awareness of TPAD. The interventions were supported by suggestive evidence; this type of evidence is below the level of evidence required for LMBP™ recommendations. We encourage additional research into the impact of these interventions on key processes and health outcomes.

Identifiers

PMID29489926
PMCPMC9491200

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.