What methods are being used to create an evidence base on the use of laboratory tests to monitor long-term conditions in primary care? A scoping review

Abstract

Background Studies have shown unwarranted variation in test ordering among GP practices and regions, which may lead to patient harm and increased health care costs. There is currently no robust evidence base to inform guidelines on monitoring long-term conditions. Objectives To map the extent and nature of research that provides evidence on the use of laboratory tests to monitor long-term conditions in primary care, and to identify gaps in existing research. Methods We performed a scoping review—a relatively new approach for mapping research evidence across broad topics—using data abstraction forms and charting data according to a scoping framework. We searched CINAHL, EMBASE and MEDLINE to April 2019. We included studies that aimed to optimize the use of laboratory tests and determine costs, patient harm or variation related to testing in a primary care population with long-term conditions. Results Ninety-four studies were included. Forty percent aimed to describe variation in test ordering and 36% to investigate test performance. Renal function tests (35%), HbA1c (23%) and lipids (17%) were the most studied laboratory tests. Most studies applied a cohort design using routinely collected health care data (49%). We found gaps in research on strategies to optimize test use to improve patient outcomes, optimal testing intervals and patient harms caused by over-testing. Conclusions Future research needs to address these gaps in evidence. High-level evidence is missing, i.e. randomized controlled trials comparing one monitoring strategy to another or quasi-experimental designs such as interrupted time series analysis if trials are not feasible.

Diagnostic Informatics—The Role of Digital Health in Diagnostic Stewardship and the Achievement of Excellence, Safety, and Value

“…Despite the existence of evidence-based guidelines to encourage best practice utilization of diagnostic tests, there are very few studies on how these guidelines have impacted testing patterns and patient outcomes. This was noted by a recent international scoping review that drew attention to the significant lack of strategies for optimizing test utilization and improving patient outcomes in general practice ( 9 ).…”

The Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on HbA1c Testing: Prioritization of High-Risk Cases and Impact of Social Deprivation

“…These findings are consistent with variation between practices in laboratory testing that we and others have previously observed both in HbA1c testing and in other areas where regular testing is required [ 21 – 23 ]. A scoping review by Elwenspoek et al highlighted that unwarranted variation in test ordering among general practices may lead to patient harm and increased health care costs [ 24 ]. During the pandemic, consistent monitoring would appear particularly important for people with sub-optimally controlled diabetes, as they had poorer outcomes in the event of SARS-CoV-2 infection [ 25 ].…”

Designing Effective ML Baseline Models using Ensemble and Probability Threshold Tuning Methods: A study on Cardiac Arrhythmia and Hospital Readmissions

“…Patients with cardiovascular and respiratory diseases frequently use multiple medications to target various mechanisms and address the underlying factor to help manage the underlying health issue, thereby amplifying the likelihood of hospital readmission.These drugs have specific biological mechanisms targeting particular symptoms and pathological processes based on each patient's individual needs and medical history [32], [33]. Moreover, demographic factors have been found to have a significant relationship with disease conditions [34].…”