Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Feb;27(1):e13880.
doi: 10.1111/hex.13880. Epub 2023 Sep 26.

Patient perceptions of in-hospital laboratory blood testing: A patient-oriented and patient co-designed qualitative study

Affiliations

Patient perceptions of in-hospital laboratory blood testing: A patient-oriented and patient co-designed qualitative study

Surakshya Pokharel et al. Health Expect. 2024 Feb.

Abstract

Background: Indiscriminate use of laboratory blood testing in hospitals contributes to patient discomfort and healthcare waste. Patient engagement in low-value healthcare can help reduce overuse. Understanding patient experience is necessary to identify opportunities to improve patient engagement with in-hospital laboratory testing.

Objectives: To understand patient experience with the process of in-hospital laboratory blood testing.

Methods: We used a qualitative study design via semistructured interviews conducted online or over the phone. Participants were adult patients or family members/caregivers (≥18 years of age) with a recent (within 12 months of interview) experience of hospitalization in Alberta or British Columbia, Canada. We identified participants through convenience sampling and conducted interviews between May 2021 and June 2022. We analysed transcripts using thematic content analysis. Recruitment was continued until code saturation was reached.

Results: We interviewed 16 participants (13 patients, 1 family member and 2 caregivers). We identified four themes from patients' experiences of in-hospital laboratory blood testing: (i) patients need information from healthcare teams about expected blood testing processes, (ii) blood draw processes should consider patient comfort and preferences, (iii) patients want information from their healthcare teams about the rationale and frequency of blood testing and (iv) patients need information on how their testing results affect their medical care.

Conclusion: Current laboratory testing processes in hospitals do not facilitate shared decision-making and patient engagement. Patient engagement with laboratory testing in hospitals requires an empathetic healthcare team that provides clear communication regarding testing procedures, rationale and results, while considering patient preferences and offering opportunities for involvement.

Patient or public contribution: We interviewed 16 patients and/or family members/caregivers regarding their in-hospital laboratory blood testing experiences. Our findings show correlations between patient needs and patient recommendations to make testing processes more patient-centred. To bring a lived-experience lens to this study, we formed a Patient Advisory Council with 9-11 patient research partners. Our patient research partners informed the research design, co-developed participant recruitment strategies, co-conducted data collection and informed the data analysis. Some of our patient research partners are co-authors of this manuscript.

Keywords: blood testing in hospitals; laboratory testing in hospitals; patient experience; patient‐oriented research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Collaboration with patient research partners through a Patient Advisory Council over the study period.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Flow diagram of participant selection for interviews.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Baumann BM, Chen EH, Mills AM, et al. Patient perceptions of computed tomographic imaging and their understanding of radiation risk and exposure. Ann Emerg Med. 2011;58(1):1‐7. - PubMed
    1. Kravitz RL, Callahan EJ. Patients' perceptions of omitted examinations and tests. J Gen Intern Med. 2000;15(1):38‐45. - PMC - PubMed
    1. O'Connor P, Detsky AS, Tansey C, Kucharczyk W. Effect of diagnostic testing for multiple sclerosis on patient health perceptions. Arch Neurol. 1994;51(1):46‐51. - PubMed
    1. van Dulmen S, Naaktgeboren C, Heus P, et al. Barriers and facilitators to reduce low‐value care: A qualitative evidence synthesis. BMJ Open. 2020;10(10):e040025. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Naugler C, Wyonch R. What the doctor ordered: improving the use and value of laboratory testing. 2019. Accessed February 6, 2023. https://www.cdhowe.org/public-policy-research/what-doctor-ordered-improv...

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources