Effectiveness of Barcoding for Reducing Patient Specimen and Laboratory Testing Identification Errors: A Laboratory Medicine Best Practices Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Published Date:Jun 28 2012
Source:Clin Biochem. 45(0):988-998.
Automatic Data Processing
Centers For Disease Control And Prevention (U.S.)
Clinical Laboratory Techniques
Comparative Effectiveness Research
Healthcare Quality Improvement
Laboratory Testing Errors
Patient Identification Systems
Patient Specimen Identification
Practice Guidelines As Topic
Quality Assurance, Health Care
Specimen Labeling Errors
Pubmed Central ID:PMC4518452
Funding:CC999999/Intramural CDC HHS/United States
W911NF-07-D-0001/DO 0191/TCN 07235/PHS HHS/United States
This is the first systematic review of the effectiveness of barcoding practices for reducing patient specimen and laboratory testing identification errors.
Design and Methods
The CDC-funded Laboratory Medicine Best Practices Initiative systematic review methods for quality improvement practices were used.
A total of 17 observational studies reporting on barcoding systems are included in the body of evidence; 10 for patient specimens and 7 for point-of-care testing. All 17 studies favored barcoding, with meta-analysis mean odds ratios for barcoding systems of 4.39 (95% CI: 3.05 – 6.32) and for point-of-care testing of 5.93 (95% CI: 5.28 – 6.67).
Barcoding is effective for reducing patient specimen and laboratory testing identification errors in diverse hospital settings and is recommended as an evidence-based “best practice.” The overall strength of evidence rating is high and the effect size rating is substantial. Unpublished studies made an important contribution comprising almost half of the body of evidence.
application/octet-stream image/gif image/jpeg image/gif image/jpeg image/gif image/jpeg image/gif image/jpeg
You May Also Like: