Which surrogate marker can be used to assess the effectiveness of the laboratory and its contribution to clinical outcome?

Annals of Clinical Biochemistry

Volumn 38, Issue 6, 2001, Pages 589-595

  Waise, A ^a   Plebani, M ^b  

^a FRIARAGE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF PADOVA   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCREDITATION; ARTICLE; CLINICAL CHEMISTRY; DIAGNOSIS, MEASUREMENT AND ANALYSIS; HUMAN; LABORATORY; RISK MANAGEMENT; STANDARD; TASK PERFORMANCE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ACCREDITATION; CHEMISTRY, CLINICAL; HUMAN; LABORATORIES; LABORATORY TECHNIQUES AND PROCEDURES; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); RISK MANAGEMENT; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS;

EID: 0035514212     PISSN: 00045632     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1258/0004563011900885     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. The College Accreditation Steering Committee. Royal College of Pathologisis' United Kingdom pilot study of laboratory accreditation. J Clin Pathol 1990; 43: 89-91
2. Steinderl SJ, Jones SJ, Howanitz PJ. Timeliness of automated routine laboratory tests: a College of American Pathologists Q-probes study of 653 institutions. Clin Chim Acta 1996; 251: 25-40
3. Gray TA. Clinical Governance. Ann Clin Biochem 2000; 37: 9-15
4. Bissell MG, Jones H. The laboratory's role in outcome assessment. Med Lab Obs 1998; 30: 56-8
5. Rosenberg W, Donald A. Evidence-based medicine: an approach to clinical problem solving. BMJ 1995; 310: 1122-6
6. Waise A. Clinical audit and the contribution of the laboratory to clinical outcome. Clin Chim Acta 1999; 280: 147-57
7. Solomon DH, Hashimoto H, Daltroy L, Laing MH. Techniques to improve physician's use of diagnostic tests: a new conceptual framework. JAMA 1998; 280: 2020-7
8. Van Wairaven C, Naylor CD. Do we know what inappropriate laboratory utilisation is? A systematic review of laboratory clinical audits. JAMA 1998; 280: 550-8
9. Jones H. A method for developing outcome measures in the clinical laboratory. Clin Lab Manage Rev 1996; 10: 115-19
10. Joint European Society on Cardiology/and the American College of Cardiology Committee A consensus document for the redefinition of myocardial infarction. JACC 2000; 36: 959-49
11. Manhapra Ajay, Borzak S. Treatment possibilities for unstable angina. BMJ 2000; 321: 1269-75
12. Hamm CW, Goldmann BU, Heeschen C, Kreymann G, Berger J, Meinertz T. Emergency room triage of patients with acute chest pain by means of rapid testing for cardiac troponin T or troponin I. N Engl J Med 1997; 337: 1648-53
13. Baldas V, Tommassini A, Trevisiol C, Berli I, Fusano A, Sblattero D, et al. Development of a novel rapid non-invasive test for coeliac disease. Gut 2000; 47: 628-31
14. Stevens G, Bennett J. Clinical audit-occurrence screening for QA. Health Service J 1989; 8:178-81
15. Ross JW, Boone DJ. Assessing the effect of mistakes in the total testing process on the quality of patient care. In: Martin L, Wagner W, Essien JDK, Eds. Institute of Critical Issues in Health Laboratory Practice. Minneapolis. MM: DuPont Press. 1991
16. Nutting PA, Main DS, Fisher PM. Problems in laboratory testing in primary care. JAMA 1996; 275: 635-9
17. Plebani M, Carraro P. Mistakes in a stat laboratory: types and frequency. Clin Chem 1997: 43: 1348-51
18. Valenstein P, Meier F. Outpatient order accuracy. A College of American Pathologists study of requisition order entry accuracy in 660 institutions. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1999; 123: 1145-50
19. Khoury M, Burnett L, Mackay MA. Error rates in Australian chemical pathology laboratories. Med J Aust 1996; 165: 128-30
20. Plebani M. L'errore in medicina di laboratorio: frequenza, cause e possibili rimedi. Quality Assurance 2000; 11: 87-94
21. Smith BJ, McNeely MDD. The influence of an expert system for test ordering and interpretation on laboratory investigations. Clin Client 1999; 45: 1168-75
22. Oosterhhuis WP, Ulenkate HJLM, Goldschmidt HMJ. Evaluation of LabRcspond, a new automated validation system for clinical laboratory test results. Clin Chem 2000: 46: 1811-17
23. The Royal College of Pathologisis. Guidelines for the provision of interpretative comments on biochemical reports, bull R Coll Pathol 1998; 104: 25
24. Marshall WJ, Challand GS. Provision of interpretative comments on biochemical report forms. Ann Clin Biochem 2000; 37: 758-63
25. Fraser CG, Fogerty V. Interpreting laboratory results. BMJ 1989; 293: 1659-60
26. Greenspan SL, Rosen HN, Parker RA. Early changes in serum N-telopeptide and C-telopeptide cross-collagen type 1 predict long-term response to alendronate therapy in women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2000; 85: 3537-40
27. Plebani M, Bernardi D, Meneghetti MF, Ujka F, Zaninotto M. Biological variability in assessing the clinical value of biochemical markers of hone turnover. Clin Chim Acta 2000; 299; 77-86
28. Carraro P, Servidio G, Plebani M. Hemolyzed specimens: a reason for rejection or a clinical challenge? Clin Chem 2000; 46: 306-7
29. Wood P, Groom G, Moore A, Ratcliffe W, Selby C. Progesterone assays: guidelines for the provision of a clinical biochemistry service. Ann Clin Biochem 1985: 22: 1-24
30. Howanitz PJ, Tetrault GA, Steindel SJ. Clinical laboratory quality control: a costly process now out of control. Clin Chim Acta 1997; 260: 163-74
31. Jenny RW, Jackson-Tarentino KY. Causes of unsatisfactory performance in proficiency testing. Clin Chem 2000; 46: 89-99