Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 3, 2026

Rapid Fractionation and Isolation of Whole Blood Components in Samples Obtained from a Community-based Setting
Published on: November 30, 2015
Project RedDE: Cluster Randomized Trial to Reduce Missed or Delayed Abnormal Laboratory Value Actions
Michael L Rinke1, David G Bundy2, Christoph U Lehmann3
1Department of Pediatrics, The Children's Hospital at Montefiore and the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, N.Y.
Insights
A quality improvement collaborative (QIC) did not immediately reduce abnormal laboratory result errors. However, sustained QIC efforts over time significantly improved patient follow-up actions.
Area of Science:
- Healthcare Quality Improvement
- Patient Safety
- Laboratory Medicine
Background:
- Failure to follow up on abnormal laboratory results is a common issue that can harm patients.
- This study aimed to assess if a quality improvement collaborative (QIC) could decrease missed or delayed actions on abnormal lab values.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the effectiveness of a quality improvement collaborative (QIC) intervention in reducing errors in the follow-up of abnormal laboratory values within pediatric practices.
Main Methods:
- A national cohort of pediatric practices was cluster-randomized to a QIC intervention.
- The intervention included video conferences, data sharing, QI coaching, and specific tools.
- Generalized mixed-effects regression models were used to compare appropriate provider actions on abnormal laboratory values between control and intervention phases.
Main Results:
- The QIC intervention did not significantly change the percentage of patients receiving appropriate actions during the initial 8-month phase (Risk Difference [RD] 1%; 95% Confidence Interval [CI] -1%, 3%).
- Post-hoc analyses revealed significant improvements in later phases: control vs. sustain phase (RD 3%; 95% CI 0.3%, 6%) and control vs. maintenance phase (RD 6%; 95% CI 3%, 9%).
Conclusions:
- The quality improvement collaborative (QIC) did not reduce abnormal laboratory errors during the initial intervention period.
- Significant reductions in errors were observed when comparing the sustain and maintenance phases (9-24 months) to the control phase, indicating long-term benefits.
Abstract:
Failure of timely abnormal laboratory result follow-up is relatively common and may lead to harm. This study hypothesized that a quality improvement collaborative (QIC) could reduce the frequency of missed or delayed action on abnormal laboratory values.
Methods:
A national cohort of pediatric practices was cluster-randomized to sequentially receive a QIC intervention: video conferences, transparent data sharing, a "focus on failures," QI coaching, and tools to help reduce missed or delayed action on abnormal laboratory values. Practices recorded the percentage of patients with 5 specific abnormal laboratory values who received an appropriate provider action (control), and then, during an 8-month intervention phase, implemented QI strategies to reduce errors (intervention). Subsequently, practices collected data on laboratory errors while working to reduce unrelated second (sustain phase), and third (maintenance phase) errors. Generalized mixed-effects regression models compared the mean percentage of patients with appropriate actions.
Results:
We randomized 43 practices, of which 31 were included in analyses. Control and intervention phases included 1,357 and 1,426 patients with abnormal laboratory values, respectively. The mean percentage of patients who received appropriate actions did not change comparing control and intervention phases [risk difference (RD) 1%; 95% CI -1%, 3%]. In post-hoc analyses, practices significantly improved comparing control to sustain (RD 3%; 95% CI 0.3%, 6%) and maintenance phases (RD 6%; 95% CI 3%, 9%).
Conclusion:
Implementation of a QIC did not reduce the frequency of abnormal laboratory errors in the initial 8-month intervention phase. A significant reduction was appreciated comparing sustain and maintenance phases (months 9-24) to the control phase.
More Related Videos
06:28E-Patient Counseling Trial E-PACO: Computer Based Education versus Nurse Counseling for Patients to Prepare for Colonoscopy
Published on: August 1, 2019
04:53A Clinical Trial Assessing the Safety, Efficacy, and Delivery of Olive-Oil-Based Three-Chamber Bags for Parenteral Nutrition
Published on: September 20, 2019
Related Concept Videos
Blinding
Randomized Experiments
Simple randomization
Simple...
Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Clinical Trials: Overview
Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs