Clinical value of add-on chemistry testing in a large tertiary-care teaching hospital

2Citations
Citations of this article
6Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: An add-on request is a new laboratory request made for a previously analyzed specimen. Despite the operational challenges it poses, it remains poorly researched. Objective: To determine the frequency and clinical value of add-on chemistry tests or panels requested to be performed on specimens that had been analyzed by routine testing, for inpatients in a 1000-bed tertiary-care teaching hospital. Methods: Using our Laboratory Information System, we retrospectively reviewed all requests for an add-on chemistry test or panel during a 1-week period. We determined the total number of routine chemistry test or panel requests, the number of add-on requests for chemistry tests or panels, and the number of abnormal results obtained for all add-on-requested tests or panels. We interviewed 65 physicians who had ordered add-on chemistry tests or panels to determine the reasons for their requests. Results: There were 323 requests (3.2% of the 10,094 routine requests) for add-on chemistry tests, as an individual chemistry test (n = 228) or a chemistry panel (n = 95) and at least one abnormal result was obtained in 56.9% (n = 184) of these tests. Of the 65 physicians interviewed, 50 (77%) made the add-on request in response to the results of the original tests or the clinical condition of the patients. Conclusion: Add-on tests appear to provide clinically relevant results and optimize the use of the blood already collected. Laboratories should identify and eliminate inefficient steps in the add-on testing process, such as poor archival practices that may hinder and delay specimen retrieval. © by the American Society for Clinical Pathology (ASCP).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Loh, T. P., Saw, S., & Sethi, S. K. (2012). Clinical value of add-on chemistry testing in a large tertiary-care teaching hospital. Laboratory Medicine, 43(3), 82–85. https://doi.org/10.1309/LMCJHMI9WMNBAS2U

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free