scholarly journals Evaluation of Children Referred to Pediatric Rheumatology Outpatient Clinic with Suspicious Laboratory Test Results

Author(s):  
Şerife Gül Karadağ ◽  
Hafize Emine Sönmez ◽  
Ayşe Tanatar ◽  
Nuray Aktay Ayaz

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to evaluate the patients who were referred to the pediatric rheumatology outpatient clinic with suspicious laboratory test results. METHODS: All patients who were referred to our outpatient clinic with suspicious laboratory test results between March 2018 and March 2019 were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 273 new patients who were referred with suspicious laboratory test results were evaluated. Among them; 48% were girls and 52% were boys and they were referred mostly from the clinics of child health and diseases (70.3%). The most frequent indications for referrals were anti-streptolysin O (ASO) elevation (n=86) and anti-nuclear antibody (ANA) positivity (n=47), while 66% of the patients were not diagnosed with rheumatic disease. None of the patients without complaints but with suspicious laboratory test results (n=49) were diagnosed with rheumatic disease. While 64.6% of those diagnosed with rheumatic diseases had periodic fever syndrome, 17.1% had juvenile idiopathic arthritis, 8.5% had postinfectious arthritis, and the remaining 9.8% had connective tissue diseases, vasculitis and uveitis. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Laboratory findings alone in childhood rheumatic diseases are not significant in patients without complaints. The diagnosis of rheumatic diseases should be made with the patient’s complaints, history, family history and physical examination findings and supported by laboratory findings. With the rational use of laboratory tests; unnecessary health expenses can be prevented and referrals of patients with nonrheumatic diseases to pediatric rheumatology outpatient clinics can be prevented.

BJGP Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. BJGPO.2021.0134
Author(s):  
Bram EL Vrijsen ◽  
Maarten J ten Berg ◽  
Wouter W van Solinge ◽  
Jan Westerink

BackgroundInappropriately repeated laboratory testing is a commonly occurring problem. However, this has not been studied extensively in the outpatient clinic after referral by general practitioners.AimThe aim of this study was to investigate how often laboratory tests ordered by the general practitioner were repeated on referral to the outpatient clinic, and how many of the normal test results remained normal on repetition.Design & settingThis is a post hoc analysis of a study on laboratory testing strategies in patients newly referred to the outpatient clinic.MethodAll patients who had a referral letter including laboratory test results ordered by the general practitioner were included. These results were compared to the laboratory test results ordered in the outpatient clinic.ResultsData were available for 295 patients, 191 of which had post-visit testing done. In this group, 56% of tests ordered by the general practitioner were repeated. Tests with abnormal results were repeated more frequently than tests with normal results (65% vs 53%; P<0.001). A longer test interval was associated with slightly smaller odds of tests being repeated (OR 0.97 [0.95–0.99]; P=0.003). Of the tests with normal test results that were repeated, 90% remained normal. This was independent of testing interval or testing strategy.ConclusionLaboratory tests ordered by the general practitioner are commonly repeated on referral to the outpatient clinic. The number of test results remaining normal on repetition suggests a high level of redundancy in laboratory test repetition.


1983 ◽  
Vol 40 (6) ◽  
pp. 1025-1034
Author(s):  
Carol L. Colvin ◽  
Raymond J. Townsend ◽  
William R. Gillespie ◽  
Kenneth S. Albert

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document