当前位置： SCI文献检索 > ARCHIVES OF PATHOLOGY & LABORATORY MEDICINE期刊下所有文献 > Comparative analytical costs of central laboratory glucose and bedside glucose testing: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study.

Comparative analytical costs of central laboratory glucose and bedside glucose testing: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study.

Abstract：

CONTEXT:One of the major attributes of laboratory testing is cost. Although fully automated central laboratory glucose testing and semiautomated bedside glucose testing (BGT) are performed at most institutions, rigorous determinations of interinstitutional comparative costs have not been performed. OBJECTIVES:To compare interinstitutional analytical costs of central laboratory glucose testing and BGT and to provide suggestions for improvement. DESIGN:Participants completed a demographic form about their institutional glucose monitoring practices. They also collected information about the costs of central laboratory glucose testing, BGT at a high-volume testing site, and BGT at a low-volume testing site, including specified cost variables for labor, reagents, and instruments. PARTICIPANTS:A total of 445 institutions enrolled in the College of American Pathologists Q-Probes program. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE:Median cost per glucose test at 3 testing sites. RESULTS:The median (10th-90th percentile range) costs per glucose test were 1.18 dollars (5.59 dollars-0.36 dollars), 1.96 dollars (9.51 dollars-0.77 dollars), and 4.66 dollars (27.54 dollars-1.02 dollars) for central laboratory, high-volume BGT sites, and low-volume BGT sites, respectively. The largest percentages of the cost per test were for labor (59.3%, 72.7%, and 85.8%), followed by supplies (27.2%, 27.3%, and 13.4%) and equipment (2.1%, 0.0%, and 0.0%) for the 3 sites, respectively. The median number of patient specimens per month at the high-volume BGT sites was 625 compared to 30 at the low-volume BGT sites. Most participants did not include labor, instrument maintenance, competency assessment, or oversight in their BGT estimated costs until required to do so for the study. CONCLUSIONS:Analytical costs per glucose test were lower for central laboratory glucose testing than for BGT, which, in turn, was highly variable and dependent on volume. Data that would be used for financial justification for BGT were widely aberrant and in need of improvement.

journal_name

Arch Pathol Lab Med

journal_title

Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine

authors

Howanitz PJ,Jones BA,College of American Pathologists.

doi

10.1043/1543-2165(2004)128<739:CACOCL>2.0.CO;2

subject

Has Abstract

pub_date

2004-07-01 00:00:00

pages

739-45

issue

eissn

0003-9985

issn

1543-2165

pii

CP3228

journal_volume

128

pub_type

杂志文章,多中心研究

在线工具

Comparative analytical costs of central laboratory glucose and bedside glucose testing: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study.