ArticleBMJ open quality2025
Quality improvement project to reduce beta-D-glucan turnaround times in an NHS pathology network.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2025. 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.
- Efficiency and safety gains from bedside electronic transfusion checks in four hospitals in England.British journal of haematology · 2026Observational
- Optimising the breast radiotherapy planning pathway: a quality improvement project at a regional cancer centre.BMJ open quality · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Beta-D-glucan (BDG) is a cell wall component of many fungi, detecting this in patients' serum permits early diagnosis of invasive fungal infections, particularly in patients with haematological malignancy. In critically ill patients in an intensive-care unit, where the prevalence of invasive fungal infection is lower, the high negative predictive value of BDG facilitates withholding or discontinuation of empirical antifungal therapy, contributing to antifungal stewardship. However, for the results of BDG testing to impact patient management, they need to be available within a clinically useful timeframe.The South West London Pathology (SWLP) network routinely sent samples for BDG testing from hospital trusts in our area to the UK Health Security Agency Mycology Reference Laboratory (MRL) at Bristol for analysis. In 2021, the mean turnaround time (TAT) was more than two times the 5-working-days standard stated in the SWLP user handbook. In this quality improvement project (QIP), we identified that the greatest delay was the MRL posting hardcopy reports. We investigated electronic reporting, first for all patient samples, and then only for intensive-care patients. However, we found that information technology (IT) and staffing limitations meant this was not viable.We then investigated commercial solutions and identified an innovative assay, which enabled the implementation of in-house BDG testing that was a good fit with our available staffing resource and laboratory environment. Our aim was to achieve at least 90% of BDG results authorised within 5 working days of sample receipt. Our QIP improved performance on this from 0.88% to 92.8% and reduced the mean TAT from 11.6 to 2.5 days and at lower unit cost. The change has been well received by our laboratory staff, and our pathology operational leads have had very positive feedback from our clinical teams and our antifungal steward.
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.