ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2022
Evaluation of a cardiac troponin process flow at the chest pain center with the shortest turnaround time.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comprehensive improvements in the emergency laboratory test process based on information technology.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2023Article
- Evaluation of a cardiac troponin process flow at the chest pain center with the shortest turnaround time.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEarly diagnosis of myocardial infarction is crucial in chest pain management and cardiac troponin (cTn) test is an important step in it. Process improvement to shorten the test turnaround time (TAT) may improve patients' outcomes. The cTn test at chest pain center (CPC) of Zhongshan Hospital had the shortest TAT ever reported, but its process flow was not fully evaluated.
methodsWe performed a stepwise evaluation of CPC cTn TAT and explored the potential factor that might cause delay. The performance of CPC cTn test was also compared with cTn test and human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) test ordered from emergency department (ED).
resultsAt least 95% of CPC cTn tests were completed in 60 min, while 62% in 30 min. The medians of monthly order-to-collect time, collect-to-received time, and received-to-result time were ~7 min, ~3 min, and ~13 min, respectively. The samples collected at the bedside had longer collect-to-received time than the ones collected at the blood draw site next to the laboratory. Compared to ED cTn test and ED HCG test, CPC cTn test took less time in each step. A combination of the sample type switch and the centrifugation time reduction contributed the most to the shortening of TAT, which was reflected in the received-to-result time.
conclusionsThe current process flow of CPC cTn test satisfied the requirements of chest pain management, giving an example of how to implement process improvement for emergency medicine to shorten TAT of laboratory tests.
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.