Aside from the increasing number of doctors' prescriptions of clinical laboratory tests, it appears noteworthy that such prescriptions are very often inappropriate [1]. In this study, we collected and evaluated doctors' prescription forms sent for the screening of the viral hepatitis B in the health district of Fasano (Brindisi, Apulia, southern Italy). We selected such an area because its population (about 37 000) is representative of Apulian citizens and may be easily monitored.
Materials and methodsA total of 310 laboratory requisition forms released because of hepatitis B virus (HBV) suspicion over the period JanuaryDecember 2005 were considered. For any prescription, (i) the formal correctness (i.e. patient's name, age, address, health code, doctor's stamp, code and signature); (ii) the diagnostic hypothesis; (iii) the number and type of tests; and (iv) the use of the correct test names [e.g. hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)] were carefully checked.The serological diagnostic approach to hepatitis consists of tests that allow, on the basis of the knowledge of the viral life cycle, the determination of both the causative virus and the infection status [2]. With regard to type B viral hepatitis, the dosages of alanine aminotransferase (ALT), urinary urobilinogen, as well as of immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibody to hepatitis B core antigen (antiHBc) or HBsAg, should be considered the markers of acute infection [3][4][5][6][7][8]. Therefore, those tests should be regarded as essential for the diagnosis of type B hepatitis, at least from a laboratory point of view. In our study, all prescriptions for any of the virological markers of HBV (i.e. HBsAg, antibody to hepatitis B surface antigen (anti-HBs), anti-HBc IgM, anti-HBc total, hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) and antibody to hepatitis B e antigen (anti-HBe)) were included in the analysis. Requests that did not prove useful for the laboratory diagnosis according to the above criteria were tagged as 'inappropriate'.