Failure to Follow-Up Test Results for Ambulatory Patients: A Systematic Review

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Serious lapses in patient care result from failure to follow-up test results. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review evidence quantifying the extent of failure to follow-up test results and the impact for ambulatory patients. DATA SOURCES: Medline, CINAHL, Embase, Inspec and the Cochrane Database were searched for Englishlanguage literature from 1995 to 2010. STUDY SELECTION: Studies which provided documented quantitative evidence of the number of tests not followed up for patients attending ambulatory settings including: outpatient clinics, academic medical or community health centres, or primary care practices. DATA EXTRACTION: Four reviewers independently screened 768 articles. RESULTS: Nineteen studies met the inclusion criteria and reported wide variation in the extent of tests not followed-up: 6.8% (79/1163) to 62% (125/202) for laboratory tests; 1.0% (4/395) to 35.7% (45/126) for radiology. The impact on patient outcomes included missed cancer diagnoses. Test management practices varied between settings with many individuals involved in the process. There were few guidelines regarding responsibility for patient notification and follow-up. Quantitative evidence of the effectiveness of electronic test management systems was limited although there was a general trend towards improved test follow-up when electronic systems were used. LIMITATIONS: Most studies used medical record reviews; hence evidence of follow-up action relied upon documentation in the medical record. All studies were conducted in the US so care should be taken in generalising findings to other countries. CONCLUSIONS: Failure to follow-up test results is an important safety concern which requires urgent attention. Solutions should be multifaceted and include: policies relating to responsibility, timing and process of notification; integrated information and communication technologies facilitating communication; and consideration of the multidisciplinary nature of the process and the role of the patient. It is essential that evaluations of interventions are undertaken and solutions integrated into the work and context of ambulatory care delivery. INTRODUCTIONFailure to follow up test results is a critical safety issue which has been identified as a major problem in ambulatory settings. [1][2][3][4] The practices and processes currently used are varied and unsystematic 2,5 and physicians 6,7 and patients 8,9 acknowledge that this needs to improve. The testing process in ambulatory settings is complex and can be divided into three broad phases, pre-analytic, analytic and post-analytic ( Fig. 1), each involving multiple steps and multiple personnel including clinicians, patients, office and laboratory staff. 10 Most primary care practices are not using electronic health records, 11 and most are communicating with multiple laboratories often not electronically connected. 12 Increased volumes of tests and the time consuming nature of test follow-up places further pressures on physicians. 6,13,14 Failure to followup can lead to missed or...

Safety Strategies in Primary Care

“…Poor communication and coordination between professionals and different elements of the health and social care system are the primary cause of many of the problems identifi ed (Dovey et al 2003 ). The lack of timely and accurate information after patients are discharged from hospital and delays in obtaining test results are both major risks (Kripalani et al 2007 ;Callen et al 2012 ). A more recent study of adverse events in primary care (ESPRIT) used a prospective method gathering data over seven consecutive days (Kret and Michel 2013 ).…”

Patient Preferences for Test Result Notification

“…9,10 A systematic review by Callen et al found that, across 19 published studies, 6.8-62 % of lab tests were not followed up on. 11 It would not be an overstatement to conclude that the health care system lacks mechanisms for ensuring that test results are consistently conveyed to patients. 3,12 As appreciation of problems inherent in test result reporting processes has increased, a number of potential solutions have been explored.…”

Building a bridge to safe diagnosis in health care. The role of the clinical laboratory

“…The report urges that each of the stakeholders helps ensure that diagnostic information, as well as the ultimate diagnosis, is reliably communicated to the interested parties. This may be the 'low hanging fruit' that could jumpstart improvement, given how often failed communication of laboratory tests is cited as a contributing factor in diagnostic error [24,25]. Finally, the analytical phase of testing also has residual areas that demand attention in regard to timeliness and reliability, for example anatomic pathology [26] and all tests that depend on visual interpretation, point-of-care tests, and tests sent to reference laboratories [27].…”