| Title |
Delay in reviewing test results prolongs hospital length of stay: a retrospective cohort study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12913-018-3181-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mei-Sing Ong, Farah Magrabi, Enrico Coiera |
| Abstract |
Failure in the timely follow-up of test results has been widely documented, contributing to delayed medical care. Yet, the impact of delay in reviewing test results on hospital length of stay (LOS) has not been studied. We examine the relationship between laboratory tests review time and hospital LOS. A retrospective cohort study of inpatients admitted to a metropolitan teaching hospital in Sydney, Australia, between 2011 and 2012 (n = 5804). Generalized linear models were developed to examine the relationship between hospital LOS and cumulative clinician read time (CRT), defined as the time taken by clinicians to review laboratory test results performed during an inpatient stay after they were reported in the computerized test reporting system. The models were adjusted for patients' age, sex, and disease severity (measured by the Charlson Comorbidity index), the number of test panels performed, the number of unreviewed tests pre-discharge, and the cumulative laboratory turnaround time (LTAT) of tests performed during an inpatient stay. Cumulative CRT is significantly associated with prolonged LOS, with each day of delay in reviewing test results increasing the likelihood of prolonged LOS by 13.2% (p < 0.0001). Restricting the analysis to tests with abnormal results strengthened the relationship between cumulative CRT and prolonged LOS, with each day of delay in reviewing test results increasing the likelihood of delayed discharge by 33.6% (p < 0.0001). Increasing age, disease severity and total number of tests were also significantly associated with prolonged LOS. Increasing number of unreviewed tests was negatively associated with prolonged LOS. Reducing unnecessary hospital LOS has become a critical health policy goal as healthcare costs escalate. Preventing delay in reviewing test results represents an important opportunity to address potentially avoidable hospital stays and unnecessary resource utilization. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 4 | 31% |
| United States | 2 | 15% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 46% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 54% |
| Scientists | 5 | 38% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 64 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 14% |
| Unknown | 21 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 16% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 14% |
| Unknown | 23 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 June 2018.
All research outputs
#4,489,844
of 23,055,429 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,087
of 7,723 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,935
of 327,737 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#85
of 220 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,055,429 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,723 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,737 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 220 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.