1 / 11

Overuse of INR and PT Testing in Medical Inpatients

Overuse of INR and PT Testing in Medical Inpatients. Kevin Pham, PGY2. Guidelines. JAMA . 1989;262(17):2429. Preoperative Testing. Liver function testing (including INR/PT) only if there are suspicions for liver disease based on prior abnormal LFTs, history, and exam.

avedis
Download Presentation

Overuse of INR and PT Testing in Medical Inpatients

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Overuse of INR and PT Testing in Medical Inpatients Kevin Pham, PGY2

  2. Guidelines JAMA. 1989;262(17):2429.

  3. Preoperative Testing • Liver function testing (including INR/PT) only if there are suspicions for liver disease based on prior abnormal LFTs, history, and exam. • Nature Clinical Practice Gastroenterology & Hepatology. 2007 ;(4) :266-276

  4. Methods • Cross sectional analysis • Sample size n=20 • Randomly review current medical inpatient charts until sample size is attained. • Only one INR/PT per patient closest to admission date was included in sample. • Inclusion criteria: medical inpatients, INR testing during current admission • Exclusion criteria: surgical, MICU, SICU, heme/onc, OB/GYN inpatients, and those without INR/PT testing.

  5. Results Total charts review: 28 INR/PT testing present: 20 INR/PT testing absent: 8 Indicated: 10 Not Indicated: 10

  6. Results • 10/20 INR/PT tested (50%) were not indicated • 1/10 INR/PT tested (10%) of the “not indicated” group was abnormal (based on UCI Medical Center laboratory reference ranges). • Abnormal INR/PT did not have clinical significant and did not change management.

  7. Results • Indications for inappropriate INR/PT testing were unknown since they were not documented. • Inappropriate INR/PT ordered by ED: 4/10 (40%) • Inappropriate INR/PT ordered by medical residents: 6/10 (60%)

  8. Results • Indications of appropriate INR/PT testing • 1/10 for Coumadin bridging for LV thrombus • 3/10 for malnutrition and invasive procedure • 3/10 for cirrhosis and invasive procedure • 3/10 for active bleeding

  9. Cost • Cost per INR/PT testing: $8.45 • Charge per test: $59.86 • Patient volume 2013 (Tower): 3,343 • Test volume 2013 for tower patients: 8,343 • Assuming 50% of INR/PT testing are inappropriate as demonstrated by these data, potential cost annually due to inappropriate INR/PT is $35,249. • Inappropriate charge to patient is $249,705.

  10. Conclusion • The incidence and cost of inappropriate INR/PT testing is high. • Increased awareness of guidelines for INR/PT testing may reduce the incidence and cost.

  11. References • Erban, S.B., et al. Routine use of the Prothrombin and Partial Thromboplastin Times. JAMA. 1989;262(17) :2429. • Hanje, A.J and Patel, T. Preoperative evaluation of patients with liver disease. Nature Clinical Practice Gastroenterology & Hepatology. 2007 ;(4) :266-276

More Related