ArticleJournal of pathology informatics2022
Impact of Interfacing Near Point of Care Clinical Chemistry and Hematology Analyzers at Urgent Care Clinics at an Academic Health System.
Article in Journal of pathology informatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- A dataset examining the impact of direct electronic medical record interfacing on the accuracy of point-of-care urinalysis results.Data in brief · 2023Article
- Data on the clinical, analytical, and laboratory factors associated with negative anion gaps at an academic medical center.Data in brief · 2022Article
- Hardware and software implementation of POCT1-A for integration of point of care testing in research.Journal of pathology informatics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPoint-of-care (POC) testing equipment is commonly utilized in outpatient clinics. Our institution recently interfaced POC chemistry and hematology devices at two outpatient clinics via middleware software to the central electronic health record (EHR), facilitating a comparison of manual transcription versus automatic reporting via interface. This allowed for estimation of serious/obvious error rates and manual time savings. Additional goals were to develop autoverification rules and analyze broad trends of results in response to common clinician complaints on the POC testing. MATERIAL AND
methodsData were obtained from two satellite clinic sites providing both primary and urgent care within an academic health system. Interface of devices was accomplished via Instrument Manager middleware software and occurred approximately halfway through the 38 month retrospective timeframe. Laboratory results for three testing POC chemistry and hematology panels were extracted with EHR tools.
resultsNearly 100,000 lab values were analyzed and revealed that the rate of laboratory values outside reference range was essentially unchanged before and after interface of POC testing devices (2.0-2.1%). Serious/obvious errors, while rare overall, declined significantly, with none recorded after the interface with autoverified results and only three related to manual edits of results that failed autoverification. Fewer duplicated test results were identified after the interface, most notably with the hematology testing. Anion gap values of less than zero were observed more frequently in POC device tests when compared to central laboratory tests and are attributed to a higher proportion of Cl values greater than 110 mEq/L and CO
conclusionsIn a switch from manual entry to automatic interface for POC chemistry and hematology, the most notable changes were reduction of serious/obvious errors and duplicate results. Significant time employee time savings highlight an additional benefit of instrument interfacing. Lastly, a difference between POC and central laboratory instruments is a higher rate of high Cl and CO
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.