SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türk Klinik Biyokimya Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 17 - Sayı: 1

Unnecessary Repeated Total PSA Tests; Evaluation with Minimum Retest Interval and Reference Change Value

Gereksiz Tekrar Edilen Total PSA Testleri; Minimum Retest İnterval ve RCV ile Değerlendirme

İlker AKARKEN
Nergiz ZORBOZAN
Pages
42–47
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Objective: The aim of study was to determine unnecessary repeated total prostate specific antigen(tPSA) according to minimum retest interval and to evaluate the change between consecutive measurement results with RCV.Material and Methods: According to report of Association for Clinical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine, when first result is raised, it is recommended to repeat tPSA once in 6 weeks to assess the trend. tPSA test results which were requested between March 2015 and 2017 in our hospital were evaluated retrospectively.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The aim of study was to determine unnecessary repeated total prostate specific antigen(tPSA) according to minimum retest interval and to evaluate the change between consecutive measurement results with RCV.Material and Methods: According to report of Association for Clinical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine, when first result is raised, it is recommended to repeat tPSA once in 6 weeks to assess the trend. tPSA test results which were requested between March 2015 and 2017 in our hospital were evaluated retrospectively.
📊
Key Findings & Data:If tPSA was>2.5 ng/mL and this test was repeated in less than 6 weeks, it was determined as unnecessary repeated test.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:We believe that our work will raise awareness about reducing unnecessary requests
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: The aim of study was to determine unnecessary repeated total prostate specific antigen(tPSA) according to minimum retest interval and to evaluate the change between consecutive measurement results with RCV.Material and Methods: According to report of Association for Clinical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine, when first result is raised, it is recommended to repeat tPSA once in 6 weeks to assess the trend. tPSA test results which were requested between March 2015 and 2017 in our hospital were evaluated retrospectively. If tPSA was>2.5 ng/mL and this test was repeated in less than 6 weeks, it was determined as unnecessary repeated test. RCV was calculated.Results: The number of tPSA was 1794 and number of consecutive tPSA requested was 427 (12.5%). The first tPSA result was>2.5 ng/mL in 46.4% (198/427) of consecutive tPSA tests, 49% of these tests(97/198) were unnecessary. RCV was calculated as 51.45%. In 82.5% (80/97) of unnecessaryrepeated tPSA, the change between two results was smaller than RCV. Number of consecutive tests which changed below RCV was significantly lower in appropriately requested tPSA tests than unnecessary repeated tPSA (p=0,002).Conclusion: Absence of significant difference between two consecutive results in unnecessary repeated test according to RCV suggests the importance of test requesting according to guidelines. We believe that our work will raise awareness about reducing unnecessary requests

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, minimum retest intervale göre gereksiz tekrarlanan total prostat spesifik antijen (tPSA) testlerini belirlemek ve ardışık ölçüm sonuçları arasındaki değişimi RCV ile değerlendirmektir.Gereç ve Yöntem: Klinik Biyokimya ve Laboratuvar Tıbbı Derneği raporuna göre, tPSA testi istenen hastalarda ilk sonucun yüksek olması durumunda eğilimi görmek için tPSA testinin 6 haftada bir kez tekrarlanması önerilmektedir. Hastanemizde Mart 2015 - 2017 arasında istemi yapılan tPSA test sonuçları retrospektif olarak değerlendirildi. Ardışık iki tPSA istemi arasındaki süre 2,5 ng/mL olan istemler uygunsuz tPSA test istemi olarak değerlendirildi. RCV hesaplandı.Bulgular: tPSA test sayısı 1794, ardışık istenen tPSA sayısı 427 (% 12,5) idi. Ardışık istenen tPSA testlerinin %46,37’sinde (198/427) ilk ölçülen tPSA test sonucu >2,5 ng/mL idi ve bu testlerin %49’u(97/198) gereksiz istemdi. RCV %51,45 olarak hesaplandı. Gereksiz tekrarlanan tPSA testlerinin % 82,5'inde(80/97) iki sonuç arasındaki değişim RCV'den küçüktü. Ardışık iki ölçüm sonucu arasındaki değişimi

🔖

Cite This Article

AKARKEN, İ., ZORBOZAN, N. (2022). Unnecessary Repeated Total PSA Tests; Evaluation with Minimum Retest Interval and Reference Change Value. Türk Klinik Biyokimya Dergisi, Cilt: 17 - Sayı: 1, 42–47. https://ajindex.com/articles/634351

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Sivananthan SN, Peterson S, Lavergne R, Barer ML, McGrail KM. Designation, diligence and drift: understanding laboratory expenditure increases in British Columbia, 1996/97 to 2005/06. BMC Health Serv Res 2012;12:472
  2. J Kwok, B Jones. Unnecessary repeat requesting of tests: an audit in a government hospital immunology laboratory. J Clin Pathol 2005;58(5): 457–462
  3. Lang T, Croal B. National minimum retesting intervals in pathology A final report detailing consensus recommendations for minimum retesting intervals for use in pathology. https://www.rcpath.org/uploads/assets/uploaded/105 58323-8ee4-4a39-84b53cb5dd0ec61b.pdf. Erişim Tarihi: 08.06.2018
  4. Harris EK, Yasaka T. On the calculation ofa ‘‘reference change’’ for comparing two consecutive measurements. Clin Chem 1983;29:25–30
  5. Theodorsson E, Magnusson B. Allowable bias when monitoring reference change values. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 2015;75(7):537-38
  6. Iglesias Canadell N, Hyltoft Petersen P, Jensen E, Ricós C, Jørgensen PE. Reference change values and power functions. Clin Chem Lab Med 2004; 42(4):415-22
  7. Graham J, Barker A. Reference Intervals. Clin Biochem Rev 2008;29(Suppl 1):S93–S97
  8. Omar F, van der Watt GF, Pillay TS. Reference change values: how useful are they? J Clin Pathol 2008 Apr;61(4):426-7
  9. Ricos C, Perich C, Minchinela J, Alvarez V, Simon S, Biosca C et al. Application of biological variation - a review. Biochemia Medica 2009;19(3):250- 59
  10. Babaian RJ, Johnston DA, Naccarato W, et al. The incidence of prostate cancer in a screening population with a serum prostate specific antigen between 2.5 and 4.0 ng/ml: relation to biopsy strategy. J Urol 2001;165:757–760
  11. Westgard J. CV individual. Available at: https://www.westgard.com/biodatabase1.htm Erişim Tarihi: 08.06.2018
  12. Westgard J. RCV. Available at: https://www.westgard.com/faq-ri-bv.htm Erişim Tarihi: 09.06.2018
  13. Konger RL, Ndekwe P, Jones G, Schmidt RP, Trey M, Baty EJ, et al. Reduction in unnecessary clinical laboratory testing through utilization management at a US government veterans affairs hospital. Am J Clin Pathol 2016;145:355–364. 14. van Walraven C, Raymond M. Population-based study of repeat laboratory testing. Clin Chem 2003;49:1997–2005 15. Baird G. The laboratory test utilization management toolbox. Biochem Med 2014;24:223-234
  14. Bates MDW, Boyle DL, Rittenberg E, et al. What proportion of common diagnostic tests appear redundant? Am J Med 1998;104:361-368
  15. Huck A, Lewandrowski K.