Why Test Results Are Still Getting "Lost" to Follow-up: a Qualitative Study of Implementation Gaps
- PMID: 33907982
- PMCID: PMC8739406
- DOI: 10.1007/s11606-021-06772-y
Why Test Results Are Still Getting "Lost" to Follow-up: a Qualitative Study of Implementation Gaps
Abstract
Background: Lack of timely follow-up of abnormal test results is common and has been implicated in missed or delayed diagnosis, resulting in potential for patient harm.
Objective: As part of a larger project to implement change strategies to improve follow-up of diagnostic test results, this study sought to identify specifically where implementation gaps exist, as well as possible solutions identified by front-line staff.
Design: We used a semi-structured interview guide to collect qualitative data from Veterans Affairs (VA) facility staff who had experience with test results management and patient safety.
Setting: Twelve VA facilities across the USA.
Participants: Facility staff members (n = 27), including clinicians, lab and imaging professionals, nursing staff, patient safety professionals, and leadership.
Approach: We conducted a content analysis of interview transcripts to identify perceived barriers and high-risk areas for effective test result management, as well as recommendations for improvement.
Results: We identified seven themes to guide further development of interventions to improve test result follow-up. Themes related to trainees, incidental findings, tracking systems for electronic health record notifications, outdated contact information, referrals, backup or covering providers, and responsibility for test results pending at discharge. Participants provided recommendations for improvement within each theme.
Conclusions: Perceived barriers and recommendations for improving test result follow-up often reflected previously known problems and their corresponding solutions, which have not been consistently implemented in practice. Better policy solutions and improvement methods, such as quality improvement collaboratives, may bridge the implementation gaps between knowledge and practice.
© 2021. This is a U.S. government work and not under copyright protection in the U.S.; foreign copyright protection may apply.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.
References
-
- Poon E, Gandhi T, Sequist T, Murff H, Karson A, Bates D. “I wish I had seen this test result earlier!”: Dissatisfaction with test result management systems in primary care. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164(20):2223–8. - PubMed
-
- Schiff GD, Kim S, Abrams R, Cosby K, Lambert B, Elstein AS. Advances in Patient Safety: From Research to Implementation (Volume 2: Concepts and Methodology) Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality AHRQ Publication Nos. 050021 (1-4); 2005. Diagnosing diagnostic errors: Lessons from a multi-institutional collaborative project; pp. 255–78.
-
- Murphy DR, Laxmisan A, Reis BA, Thomas EJ, Esquivel A, Forjuoh SN, et al. Electronic health record-based triggers to detect potential delays in cancer diagnosis. BMJ Qual Saf. 2014;23(1):8–16. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous
