Temporal growth and geographic variation in the use of laboratory tests by NHS general practices: Using routine data to identify research priorities

British Journal of General Practice

Volumn 63, Issue 609, 2013, Pages

  Busby, John ^a   Schroeder, Knut ^b   Woltersdorf, Wolfram ^d   Sterne, Jonathan A C ^b   Ben Shlomo, Yoav ^b   Hay, Alastair ^b   Hollingworth, William ^c  

^a Research Assistant in Health Economics   (United Kingdom)

^b Department of Medical Statistics and Epidemiology and Head of School ^*

^c University of Bristol Canynge Hall   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS BRISTOL NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Clinical laboratory techniques; Economics; Evidence based medicine; Physician practice patterns; Primary health care; Trends

Indexed keywords

C REACTIVE PROTEIN; HEART ENZYME;

ARTICLE; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; GENERAL PRACTICE; GEOGRAPHY; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HUMAN; LABORATORY TEST; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OCCULT BLOOD; PLASMA VISCOSITY;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; C-REACTIVE PROTEIN; CLINICAL LABORATORY TECHNIQUES; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ENGLAND; FEMALE; GENERAL PRACTICE; HEMATOLOGIC TESTS; HUMANS; MALE; MASS SCREENING; OCCULT BLOOD; PRIMARY HEALTH CARE; REGIONAL HEALTH PLANNING; RESEARCH; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; STATE MEDICINE;

EID: 84876254177     PISSN: 09601643     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3399/bjgp13X665224     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Lord Carter of Coles. Report of the review of NHS pathology services in England. London: DoH Publications, 2006.
2. Commission for Healthcare Audit and Inspection. Getting results: pathology services in acute and specialist trusts. London: Commission for Healthcare Audit and Inspection, 2007.
3. NHS Employers and General Practitioners Committee. Quality and Outcomes Framework guidance for GMS contract 2009/10. Delivering investment in general practice. London: The NHS Confederation (Employers) Company Ltd, 2009.
4. Bayram C. Evidence-practice gap in GP pathology test ordering: a comparison of BEACH pathology data and recommended testing. Sydney: Family Medicine Research Centre, University of Sydney, 2009.
5. Rao GG, Crook M, Tillyer ML. Pathology tests: is the time for demand management ripe at last? J Clin Pathol 2003; 56(4): 243-248.
6. Mindemark M, Wernroth L, Larsson A. Costly regional variations in primary health care test utilization in Sweden. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 2010; 70(3): 164-170.
7. Song Y, Skinner J, Bynum J, et al. Regional variations in diagnostic practices. N Engl J Med 2010; 363(1): 45-53.
8. Verstappen WH, ter Riet G, Dubois WI, et al. Variation in test ordering behaviour of GPs: professional or context-related factors? Fam Pract 2004; 21(4): 387-395.
9. McNulty CA, Freeman E, Bowen J, et al. Diagnosis of genital chlamydia in primary care: an explanation of reasons for variation in chlamydia testing. Sex Transm Infect 2004; 80(3): 207-211.
10. Smellie WS, Galloway MJ, Chinn D, Gedling P. Is clinical practice variability the major reason for differences in pathology requesting patterns in general practice? J Clin Pathol 2002; 55(4): 312-314.
11. Smellie WS, Clark G, McNulty CA. Inequalities of primary care microbiology testing between hospital catchment areas. J Clin Pathol 2003; 56(12): 933-936.
12. Wennberg JE, Barnes BA, Zubkoff M. Professional uncertainty and the problem of supplier-induced demand. Soc Sci Med 1982; 16(7): 811-824.
13. Studdert DM, Mello MM, Sage WM, et al. Defensive medicine among high-risk specialist physicians in a volatile malpractice environment. JAMA 2005; 293(21): 2609-2617.
14. van Bokhoven MA, Pleunis-van Empel MC, Koch H, et al. Why do patients want to have their blood tested? A qualitative study of patient expectations in general practice. BMC Fam Pract 2006; 7: 75.
15. Pan American Health Organization. Standardization: a classic epidemiological method for the comparison of rates. Epidemiol Bull 2002; 23(3): 9-12.
16. Gray J, Orr D, Majeed A. Use of Read codes in diabetes management in a south London primary care group: implications for establishing disease registers. BMJ 2003; 326(7399): 1130.
17. Information Services Division Scotland. Grouping of codes for conditions (RCGs). http://www.isdscotland.org/Health-Topics/General-Practice/PTI- Statistics/Grouping-clinical-codes.asp (accessed 12 Mar 2013).
18. Khan NF, Harrison SE, Rose PW. Validity of diagnostic coding within the General Practice Research Database: a systematic review. Br J Gen Pract 2010; DOI: 10.3399/bjgp10X483562.
19. Herrett E, Thomas SL, Schoonen WM, et al. Validation and validity of diagnoses in the General Practice Research Database: a systematic review. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2010; 69(1): 4-14.
20. Thomas SL, Edwards CJ, Smeeth L, et al. How accurate are diagnoses for rheumatoid arthritis and juvenile idiopathic arthritis in the general practice research database? Arthritis Rheum 2008; 59(9): 1314-1321.
21. Lawrenson R, Williams T, Farmer R. Clinical information for research; the use of general practice databases. J Public Health Med 1999; 21(3): 299-304.
22. Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency. GPRD recording guidelines for vision users. London: Crown Copyright, 2004.
23. Anonymous. GPRD Users' Group meeting. Scribe 2005; 8(4): 20.
24. Australian Association of Pathology Practices Inc. An analysis of pathology test use in Australia. Sydney: Family Medicine Research Centre, University of Sydney, 2011.
25. The King's Fund. The role of GPs in maternity care - what does the future hold? London: The King's Fund, 2010.
26. Galloway MJ, Osgerby JC. An audit of the indications for the reporting of blood films: results from the National Pathology Benchmarking Study. J Clin Pathol 2006; 59(5): 479-481.
27. Vercoutere W, Thevissen K, Bombardier C, Landewe RB. Diagnostic and predictive value of acute-phase reactants in adult undifferentiated peripheral inflammatory arthritis: a systematic review. J Rheumatol Suppl 2011; 87: 15-19.
28. National Collaborating Centre for Chronic Conditions (UK). Rheumatoid arthritis: national clinical guideline for management and treatment in adults. London: Royal College of Physicians, 2009.
29. Smellie WS, McNulty CA, Collinson PO, et al. Best practice in primary care pathology: review 12. J Clin Pathol 2010; 63(4): 330-336.
30. Smellie WS, Vanderpump MP, Fraser WD, et al. Best practice in primary care pathology: review 11. J Clin Pathol 2008; 61(4): 410-418.
31. Smellie WS, Shaw N, Bowley R, et al. Best practice in primary care pathology: review 10. J Clin Pathol 2007; 60(11): 1195-1204.
32. Wathen B, Dean T. An evaluation of the impact of NICE guidance on GP prescribing. Br J Gen Pract 2004; 54(499): 103-107.
33. Gerrits M, Avery T, Lagro-Janssen A. Urinary incontinence management in women: audit in general practice. J Eval Clin Pract 2008; 14(5): 836-838.
34. van den Brandhof WE, Bartelds AI, Koopmans MP, van Duynhoven YT. General practitioner practices in requesting laboratory tests for patients with gastroenteritis in the Netherlands, 2001-2002. BMC Fam Pract 2006; 7: 56.
35. Bunting PS, Van WC. Effect of a controlled feedback intervention on laboratory test ordering by community physicians. Clin Chem 2004; 50(2): 321-326.
36. Mindemark M, Larsson A. Long-term effects of an education programme on the optimal use of clinical chemistry testing in primary health care. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 2009; 69(4): 481-486.
37. Sood R, Sood A, Ghosh AK. Non-evidence-based variables affecting physicians' test-ordering tendencies: a systematic review. Neth J Med 2007; 65(5): 167-177.
38. Thomas RE, Croal BL, Ramsay C, et al. Effect of enhanced feedback and brief educational reminder messages on laboratory test requesting in primary care: a cluster randomised trial. Lancet 2006; 367(9527): 1990-1996.
39. Poley MJ, Edelenbos KI, Mosseveld M, et al. Cost consequences of implementing an electronic decision support system for ordering laboratory tests in primary care: evidence from a controlled prospective study in the Netherlands. Clin Chem 2007; 53(2): 213-219.
40. van Wijk MA, van der Lei J, Mosseveld M, et al. Assessment of decision support for blood test ordering in primary care: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2001; 134(4): 274-281.
41. Shalev V, Chodick G, Heymann AD. Format change of a laboratory test order form affects physician behavior. Int J Med Inform 2009; 78(10): 639-644.
42. Verstappen WH, van der Weijden T, Dubois WI, et al. Improving test ordering in primary care: the added value of a small-group quality improvement strategy compared with classic feedback only. Ann Fam Med 2004; 2(6): 569-575.
43. Schroeder SA, Myers LP, McPhee SJ, et al. The failure of physician education as a cost containment strategy. Report of a prospective controlled trial at a university hospital. JAMA 1984; 252(2): 225-230.
44. National Institute for Health and Clincial Excellence. Rheumatoid arthritis: the management of rheumatoid arthritis in adults. (CG79). London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, 2009.