ArticleAfrican journal of primary health care & family medicine2023
Appropriateness of laboratory expenditure for primary health care facilities across South Africa.
Article in African journal of primary health care & family medicine, 2023. 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.
- Changes in Hospitalization Expenditures and Length of Stay for Patients Underwent Hysterectomy and Adnexectomy for Carcinoma in situ and Nonmalignant Lesions Diagnosis-Related Group: Impact of Beijing's Medicine-Consumables Linkage Reforms.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2026Article
- Assessing laboratory specimen losses for the city of Johannesburg, South Africa.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrimary health care (PHC) services have been prioritised from a cost-containment perspective. To manage expenditure, facility managers use the Laboratory Handbook that indicates the Essential Laboratory List (ELL) tests.
aimThe aim of this study was to analyse PHC laboratory expenditure to assess the impact of the ELL in South Africa.
settingWe reported ELL compliance at the national, provincial and health district levels.
methodsA retrospective cross-sectional study was used to analyse data for the 2019 calendar year. The unique tariff code descriptions were used to develop a lookup table to identify ELL compliant testing. Researchers analysed data for the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) conditional grant tests and by facility for the bottom two districts.
resultsThere were 356 497 tests (1.3%) that were not ELL compliant that equated to an expenditure of $2.4 million. Essential Laboratory List compliance ranged from 97.9% to 99.2% for clinics, community healthcare centres and community day centres. The provincial ELL compliance ranged from 97.6% for the Western Cape to 99.9% for the Mpumalanga province. The average cost per ELL test was $7.92. At the district level, ELL compliance ranged from 93.4% for Central Karoo to 100% for Ehlanzeni.
conclusionsHigh levels of ELL compliance have been demonstrated from the national to the health district level, demonstrating the value of the ELL.Contribution: This study provides data for quality improvement initiatives at primary care facilities.
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.