BACKGROUND:Previous studies have noted a high (41%) prevalence and poor discharge summary communication of pending laboratory (lab) tests at the time of hospital discharge for general medical patients. However, the prevalence and communication of pending labs within a high-risk population, specifically those patients discharged to sub-acute care (i.e., skilled nursing, rehabilitation, long-term care), remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence and nature of lab tests pending at hospital discharge and their inclusion within hospital discharge summaries, for common sub-acute care populations. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Stroke, hip fracture, and cancer patients discharged from a single large academic medical center to sub-acute care, 2003-2005 (N=564) MAIN MEASURES: Pending lab tests were abstracted from the laboratory information system (LIS) and from each patient's discharge summary, then grouped into 14 categories and compared. Microbiology tests were subdivided by culture type and number of days pending prior to discharge. KEY RESULTS: Of sub-acute care patients, 32% (181/ 564) were discharged with pending lab tests per the LIS; however, only 11% (20/181) of discharge summaries documented these. Patients most often left the hospital with pending microbiology tests (83% [150/181]), particularly blood and urine cultures, and reference lab tests (17% [30/181]). However, 82% (61/74) of patients' pending urine cultures did not have 24-hour preliminary results, and 19% (13/70) of patients' pending blood cultures did not have 48-hour preliminary results available at the time of hospital discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one-third of the subacute care patients in this study had labs pending at discharge, but few were documented within hospital discharge summaries. Even after considering the availability of preliminary microbiology results, these omissions remain common. Future studies should focus on improving the communication of pending lab tests at discharge and evaluating the impact that this improved communication has on patient outcomes.KEY WORDS: laboratory tests; hospital discharge; sub-acute care.
Failure to follow up test results pending at discharge (TPAD) from hospitals or emergency departments is a major patient safety concern. The purpose of this review is to systematically evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to improve follow-up of laboratory TPAD. We conducted literature searches in PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, and EMBASE using search terms for relevant health care settings, transition of patient care, laboratory tests, communication, and pending or missed tests. We solicited unpublished studies from the clinical laboratory community and excluded articles that did not address transitions between settings, did not include an intervention, or were not related to laboratory TPAD. We also excluded letters, editorials, commentaries, abstracts, case reports, and case series. Of the 9,592 abstracts retrieved, 8 met the inclusion criteria and reported the successful communication of TPAD. A team member abstracted predetermined data elements from each study, and a senior scientist reviewed the abstraction. Two experienced reviewers independently appraised the quality of each study using published LMBP™ A-6 scoring criteria. We assessed the body of evidence using the A-6 methodology, and the evidence suggested that electronic tools or one-on-one education increased documentation of pending tests in discharge summaries. We also found that automated notifications improved awareness of TPAD. The interventions were supported by suggestive evidence; this type of evidence is below the level of evidence required for LMBP™ recommendations. We encourage additional research into the impact of these interventions on key processes and health outcomes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.