Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by GILIO, C
Right arrow Articles by SCHEYS, I
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by GILIO, C
Right arrow Articles by SCHEYS, I
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Family Practice Vol. 10, No. 2, 118-123
© Oxford University Press 1993

research-article

The Influence of a Desk-top Analyser on the Number of Laboratory Tests used in Daily General Practice. A Randomized Controlled Trial

C GILIO*,, F BUNTINX*,{ddagger}, O DE KEZEL** and I SCHEYS***

*flemish Institute for research in General Practice
{ddagger}Catholic University of Louvain, Department of General Practice
**Boehringer Mannheim Belgium, Department of Decentralized Diagnostics
***Catholic University of Louvain, Department of Epidemiology

{dagger}To whom correspondence should be addressed at Ringlaan 65, 8-3630 Massmechelen, Belgium

This study evaluated the influence of a desk-top analyser, used in general practice, on the mean number of blood tests per contact, prescribed or analysed by general practitioners. A randomized controlled trial was used. The mean number of blood tests per contact requested by two groups of GPs, before and after the introduction of a Reflotron in the intervention group was compared. Practitioners were assigned to the control group or to the intervention group by stratified randomization. Flemish GPs, known by the Flemish Institute of General Practice as interested in research were enrolled into the study. There were two registration periods of 8 weeks each. The weekly number of doctor-patient contacts and all requested or performed blood tests for each patient were registered. During the second period the members of the intervention group were asked to use the Reflotron, following their own judgement, and to register the total number of tests per contact, performed with it, on a special form. In the Reflotron group there was a slight increase in the median of the relative differences between the intervention and the base-line period (3%). In the control group the median of the relative differences decreased (–7%). The difference bet ween both groups was not statistically significant (P=0.17). In both groups the size and direction of the relative differences of the individual practices were very different. No statistically significant differences were found in any of the subgroups.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.