Presentation on theme: "Sarah Heap 16.4.12. Varied response from Trusts No clear pattern of withdrawn tests Hard to target areas for action Responses from 15 Trusts "— Presentation transcript:
Sarah Heap 16.4.12
Varied response from Trusts No clear pattern of withdrawn tests Hard to target areas for action Responses from 15 Trusts Many had tests were identified by single respondents Plan Recirculate amended questionnaire
Sent out 27.3.12 8 respondents (more following prompting at meeting) More useful data Consultant only requests Tests considering for withdrawal Withdrawn tests Short response time If you’re here and you’ve not responded please, please, please can I have your data!
YesNo (offered to all)No responseAdditional Info Serum Free Light Chains451 Haem consultants (2), Immunology (2), Haem (1) Thyroglobulin181if approp to patient (4) Faecal Calprotectin361 not lab funded (2), never offered(1) Urine myoglobin*171 CK in range 500-10000 dipstick +ve (1) vetted/muscle specialist (1) Antinuclear antibodies pattern and titre 9 Immunology (3) HLA DQ2/8261 gastro- consultants(2), Immunology (2) fT3/fT4 (use of rule based system)56 fT3 rule based (3) TSH only (3), dependent on other results(8), t3 for endocrinologists genetic testing631 requestor charged (2), vet (2) CRP 10 hsCRP for funded research (1)
YesNon/aAdditional Info FOB514 GP - pregnancy test 56other dept(3) urea 10 copper and zinc 110 Alpha 1 acid glycoprotein*354withdrawn already (3) Other - Please specify AST1 24hr urine protein1 random protein/creat ratio (NICE)
CKMB Faecal fat Colloid oncotic pressure Pancreolauryl test Red cell transketolase Amniotic fluid optical density Amniotic fluid AFP/cholinesterase Amniotic fluid lecithin/sphingomyelin ratio The Rest…
Address those tests with split yes/no Expert opinion in that area Endocrinology, IMD etc Labs still offering/supporting use Workload data Ensure data covers funded tests More data from other labs Come up with a consensus opinion Vetting subgroups
Can we use this to centralise tests with smaller numbers? Promote good practice
Tests suggested are not those with vast workloads Have we been radical enough?