RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To assess the appropriateness of laboratory testing intervals and antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) incidence. METHODS: Between January 2010 and August 2022, insurance claims data of patients with disease codes for other thrombophilia (D68.6) and APS (V253) were retrieved in South Korea. Patients who received antiphospholipid antibody tests more than twice were classified as having suspected APS. The interval between the first 2 antiphospholipid antibody tests was evaluated in the patients with suspected APS. Patients with suspected APS who received anticoagulants for >180 days were classified as having APS. RESULTS: Overall, 8656 patients were classified as having suspected APS. The testing interval for the first 2 tests in patients with suspected APS was <6 and <12 weeks in 11.1% and 20.6% of cases, respectively, in 2010, gradually increasing to 21.0% and 35.4%, respectively, in 2021. Subsequently, 4344 patients were classified as having APS, with 65.0% being female. Only 330 patients were diagnosed with APS in 2021, down from 436 in 2020. CONCLUSION: This study showed a gradual increase in patients receiving antiphospholipid antibody testing with an inappropriate short-term interval, underscoring the need for laboratory stewardship to ensure an appropriate interval for APS testing.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Detecting hepatitis C virus (HCV) reinfection among key populations helps prevent ongoing transmission. This systematic review aims to determine the association between different testing intervals during post-SVR follow-up on the detection of HCV reinfection among highest risk populations. METHODS: We searched electronic databases between January 2014 and February 2023 for studies that tested individuals at risk for HCV reinfection at discrete testing intervals and reported HCV reinfection incidence among key populations. Pooled estimates of reinfection incidence were calculated by population and testing frequency using random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Forty-one single-armed observational studies (9453 individuals) were included. Thirty-eight studies (8931 individuals) reported HCV reinfection incidence rate and were included in meta-analyses. The overall pooled estimate of HCV reinfection incidence rate was 4.13 per 100 per person-years (py) (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.45-4.81). The pooled incidence estimate among people who inject drugs (PWID) was 2.84 per 100 py (95% CI: 2.19-3.50), among men who have sex with men (MSM) 7.37 per 100 py (95% CI: 5.09-9.65) and among people in custodial settings 7.23 per 100 py (95% CI: 2.13-16.59). The pooled incidence estimate for studies reporting a testing interval of ≤6 months (4.26 per 100 py; 95% CI: 2.86-5.65) was higher than studies reporting testing intervals >6 months (5.19 per 100 py; 95% CI: 3.92-6.46). CONCLUSIONS: HCV reinfection incidence was highest in studies of MSM and did not appear to change with retesting interval. Shorter testing intervals are likely to identify more reinfections, help prevent onward transmission where treatment is available and enable progress towards global HCV elimination, but additional comparative studies are required.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Introduction . Acute diarrhoea can be caused by Salmonella species, Shigella species, Yersinia enterocolitica, Campylobacter species and Plesiomonas shigelloides (SSYCP). In clinical practice, however, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for SSYCP is frequently performed as part of the diagnostic work-up for patients with chronic diarrhoea and gastrointestinal complaints.Hypothesis. This study postulates that PCR for SSYCP is of limited clinical use in patients with chronic diarrhoea and gastrointestinal complaints.Aim. The primary aim of this study is to evaluate whether testing for SSYCP remains sensible in patients with chronic diarrhoea and gastrointestinal symptoms and if earlier testing leads to more positive PCR results.Methodology. Between January 2017 and December 2018, data on PCR results, culture results, symptoms, symptom to testing interval (STI) and immune status were retrospectively collected from the medical records of patients with gastrointestinal symptoms for whom PCR results for SSYCP were available. The STIs of PCR-positive patients and PCR-negative patients were compared.Results. In total, 146 PCR-positive and 149 PCR-negative patients were included. STIs of <7 days occurred in 55 % of all PCR-positive patients compared to 38 % in PCR-negative patients. PCR-positive patients were more often tested within 7 days after onset of gastrointestinal symptoms or diarrhoea. A third of PCR-positive patients had an STI of >7 days. Immunocompromised patients had a shorter STI. Admitted patients had a shorter STI. Eighty-six PCR-positive patients had a positive culture (58 %). Antibiotic use 3 months prior to PCR testing was correlated with negative PCR results.Conclusions . This study shows that early testing correlates with more positive PCR results and underlines that PCR for SSYCP is of lesser importance in the diagnostic workup of chronic diarrhoea and/or gastrointestinal symptoms. The shorter STI found in immunocompromised patients is possibly due to a lower threshold for testing in this population. It is also important to take recent antibiotic use into consideration when interpreting PCR results, given the correlation between negative PCR results and antibiotic use. Careful and precise documentation of symptoms in medical records is essential for clinical practice and research.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Warfarin has been used as an anticoagulant by millions of patients due to its effectiveness, availability, and low cost. Evidence on the safe extension of international normalized ratio (INR) testing frequency remains an area of interest, especially during the recent COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study is to safely extend INR testing intervals in patients throughout a multisite, system-wide anticoagulation clinic. Updates were made to the pharmacist's collaborative practice agreement (CPA) and nurse protocol to optimize practice and allow INR testing interval extension up to a maximum of 8-weeks. The primary outcome was the change in duration between INR tests (INR testing interval) measured before and after providing staff education on clinic updates. The mean duration between INR tests (SD) was 23.69 days (11.29) in the pre-intervention period and 25.58 days (13.91) in the post-intervention period. During the COVID-19 pandemic (post2), intervals were extended further to 27.81 days (14.96), demonstrating a statistically significant increase in INR testing interval from pre-intervention to post-intervention and to post2 (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). A secondary outcome indicated the mean time in therapeutic range (SD) showed no significant difference in pre-intervention 70.11% (25.95) versus post-intervention of 69.76% (25.69) with a difference of - 0.35% (29.93) (p = 0.956) or versus the post2 of 68.82% (27.20) with a difference of - 1.29% (33.20) (p = 0.120). This study showed that changes to the CPA and protocol allowed for a significant increase in INR testing interval while simultaneously maintaining a mean time in therapeutic range > 60% for the clinic population.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

@#Introduction: Laboratory tests account for 66% of clinical decision making and reducing inappropriate test utilisation is a step towards optimising patients’ care and hospital cost savings. This study aims to identify the rate and cost of redundant test requests in our centre. Methods: A cross-sectional study comprising laboratory results of 14 analytes in renal function test (RFT) and liver function test (LFT) were made. Data involved blood results from adult patients admitted to Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia from January to December 2018. The redundant test is defined as test results consecutively normal twice and requested within 26 hours for analytes in RFT and 50 hours for analytes in LFT. Cost contributions were estimated by multiplying cost-per-test with total redundant requests. The test redundancy in different wards and disease groups were also evaluated. Results: Equal distribution of RFT and LFT requests were observed in both genders (50% respectively), with the most requests seen in the 60 – 79 years age group. More than 20% redundancy rate was observed for seven analytes (ALT, total bilirubin, sodium, urea, potassium, AST, Chloride), and overall redundancy was 19.7%, equals to Malaysian Ringgit (MYR) 669,105.00. Oncology wards and genitourinary diseases contribute to the highest redundancy rate. Conclusion: This study estimated MYR 600 thousands of saving if test redundancy were to be eliminated. The finding is hoped to serve as a platform for future intervention and policymaking. Future planning to optimise the current laboratory request system and collaboration among physicians and laboratory professionals can minimise test inappropriateness.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Practice effects associated with the repeated administration of cognitive tests often confound true therapeutic or experimental effects. Alternate test forms help reduce practice effects, but generating stimulus sets with identical properties can be difficult. The main objective of this study was to disentangle practice and stimulus set effects for Cognition, a battery of 10 brief cognitive tests specifically designed for high-performing populations with 15 unique versions for repeated testing. A secondary objective was to investigate the effects of test-retest interval on practice effects. METHODS: The 15 versions of Cognition were administered in three groups of 15-16 subjects (total N = 46, mean±SD age 32.5 ± 7.2 years, range 25-54 years, 23 male) in a randomized but balanced fashion with administration intervals of ≥10 days, ≤5 days, or 4 times per day. Mixed effect models were used to investigate linear and logarithmic trends across repeated administrations in key speed and accuracy outcomes, whether these trends differed significantly between administration interval groups, and whether stimulus sets differed significantly in difficulty. RESULTS: Protracted, non-linear practice effects well beyond the second administration were observed for most of the 10 Cognition tests both in accuracy and speed, but test-retest administration interval significantly affected practice effects only for 3 out of the 10 tests and only in the speed domain. Stimulus set effects were observed for the 6 Cognition tests that use unique sets of stimuli. Factors were established that allow for correcting for both practice and stimulus set effects. CONCLUSIONS: Practice effects are pronounced and probably under-appreciated in cognitive testing. The correction factors established in this study are a unique feature of the Cognition battery that can help avoid masking practice effects, address noise generated by differences in stimulus set difficulty, and facilitate interpretation of results from studies with repeated assessments.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

(1) Background: Although current guidelines recommend regular lipid testing for dyslipidemia patients, the effectiveness of regular lipid profile monitoring in clinical outcomes is unclear. (2) Methods: We assessed 64,664 newly diagnosed dyslipidemia patients from the Korean National Health Insurance Service Health Screening Cohort from 2003-2011 For lipid-testing frequency from all admission and outpatient records for 3 years after diagnosis. Participants were followed until 31 December 2015 for stroke. We used Cox regression analysis to determine the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for stroke according to lipid-testing interval. (3) Results: Compared to patients with lipid-testing intervals of ≤6 months, patients with >6 to ≤12 (aHR 1.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08-1.61), >12 to ≤18 (aHR 1.48, 95% CI 1.20-1.82), and >18 (aHR 1.54, 95% CI 1.25-1.90) month testing intervals had elevated risk of total stroke (p for trend <0.001). A significant association existed between lipid-testing interval and total and ischemic stroke risk in the >6 to ≤12 (aHR 1.62, 95% CI 1.19-2.21), >12 to ≤18 (aHR 1.87, 95% CI 1.36-2.58), and >18 (aHR 1.79, 95% CI 1.30-2.48) month interval groups, but no significant association existed between lipid-testing interval and hemorrhagic stroke risk. (4) Conclusions: Lipid-testing intervals of more than 6 months may lead to increased stroke risk among newly diagnosed dyslipidemia patients after initiation of statin treatment. Lipid testing every 6 months can lower stroke risk among dyslipidemia patients.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a public health challenge; however, evidence-based, optimal follow-up intervals for patients with CKD have not been identified. This study aimed to identify appropriate follow-up intervals for different stages of CKD. METHODS: We studied 2682 patients with CKD. The number of patients experiencing a 50% increase in creatinine and those reaching end-stage renal failure were examined on the basis of their CKD stage. The renal function testing interval was defined as the estimated time for 0.1% of the patients with CKD to have a composite renal outcome, after adjusting for clinical risk factors. Transitions from CKD stage-based subgroups were analyzed using parametric cumulative incidence models. Other sensitivity analyses involved estimation of the time to renal event occurrence for 1% of patients. RESULTS: Of the 913 patients (34%) who had a composite renal event, 29 had stage 3A (10.5%), 151 had stage 3B (16.3%), 429 had stage 4 (41.0%), and 304 had stage 5 CKD (70.9%). The estimated renal function testing intervals for patients with CKD were 6.0 months for stage 3A, 3.4 months for stage 3B, 2.0 months for stage 4, and 1.2 months for stage 5. CONCLUSIONS: The optimal follow-up intervals were longer for patients with lower CKD stages. These estimates are longer than those recommended by the current guidelines and serve as a reference for nephrologists in selecting an appropriate follow-up interval for each patient. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN clinical trial registry number: UMIN000020038.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The study aims to evaluate the rate of transition to osteoporosis in 360 RA patients and estimate the rescreening intervals of bone mineral density (BMD) testing. Osteoporosis was newly developed in 24.8 % during mean follow-up of 7.4 years. The estimated time of a BMD testing interval was dependent on the baseline T-score in RA patients. INTRODUCTION: Although BMD testing is routinely performed in RA patients, the interval between BMD tests has not been determined. METHODS: We retrospectively recruited 360 consecutive female patients with RA, who underwent repeated BMD testing, with a mean age of 53.7 ± 10.2 years and a mean follow-up duration of 7.4 ± 5.0 years. We stratified the study participants into five groups based on their baseline T-score range. The testing interval was defined as the estimated time for 10 % of patients in each subgroup to transition to osteoporosis. Competing-risk analyses were performed with sensitivity analysis by menopausal status and risk factors for transition to osteoporosis. RESULTS: At baseline, 15 % of screened patients had osteoporosis, and during follow-up, that proportion increased to 24.8 %. The estimated BMD testing interval for 10 % of patients to develop osteoporosis was 9.6 years for those with normal BMD, 7.6 years for those with mild osteopenia, 4.7 years for those with moderate osteopenia, and 2.1 years for those with severe osteopenia. No significant risk factor for transition to osteoporosis was identified in this cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that osteoporosis will develop in less than 10 % of female RA patients during rescreening intervals of approximately 9 years for those with normal bone density at baseline, 7 years for those with mild osteopenia, 4 years for those with moderate osteopenia, and 2 years for those with severe osteopenia at baseline. BMD interval in RA patients could be adjusted according to their baseline BMD T-scores.

Asunto(s)