MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989880289 · doi:10.1182/blood-2019-124219

Use of Routine Bloodwork on General Internal Medicine Inpatients: A Retrospective Cohort Study

2019· article· en· W2989880289 on OpenAlexaffabout
William K. Silverstein, Adina Weinerman, Rick Wang, Lisa K. Hicks, R. Sacha Bhatia, Wendy Levinson, Fahad Razak, Amol A. Verma

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare cost, quality, practices
Canadian institutionsWomen in Science and Engineering Newfoundland and LabradorWomen's College HospitalSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRetrospective cohort studyIntensive care unitEmergency medicineCohortPopulationBlood transfusionCohort studyAnemiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Choosing Wisely (CW) recommendations in Canada and the United States advise against routine blood work on stable inpatients because it is unlikely to improve patient care, is associated with anemia and pain, and increases costs. While numerous local quality improvement initiatives have effectively reduced the use of routine blood work (RBW), no population-level analyses have assessed the use of RBW on hospitalized patients in the CW era. This study aimed to describe the use of RBW between 2010 and 2017 by physicians caring for General Internal Medicine (GIM) inpatients at 7 hospitals. We hypothesized that RBW use would decrease over time and that increased use of RBW would be associated with greater reductions in hemoglobin. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study using the General Medicine Inpatient Initiative (GEMINI) database, based in Ontario, Canada. The GEMINI database contains clinical and administrative data for all patients admitted to a GIM service at seven hospitals (5 academic centres; 2 community hospitals) in Toronto and Mississauga. We included all patients included in the GEMINI database, admitted from April 1, 2010 (prior to CW Canada), to March 31, 2017 (3 years after CW Canada's launch). Patients were excluded if they were admitted with a bleeding diagnosis, underwent an endoscopic or surgical procedure, were admitted to an Intensive Care Unit, or were admitted to hospital for less than 72 hours or greater than 30 days. Patients that received a blood transfusion during the first 48 hours of admission, or did not have hemoglobin measured within their first 48 hours of admission were also excluded. Physicians were excluded if they were the most responsible physician (MRP) for fewer than 100 admissions. Our primary outcome was the mean volume of RBW ordered per patient per day by the MRP. RBW was defined as complete blood count, electrolytes, extended electrolytes, creatinine, liver panel, INR, or PTT. To examine changes in the distribution of RBW ordering over time, we report RBW use at the following physician percentiles: 10, 25, 50, 75, 90. Prior analyses of the relationship between RBW use and reduction in Hgb in hospital are confounded (sicker patients receive more bloodwork). To avoid this confounding, we examined change in Hgb among patients of physicians stratified by RBW use. Patients are quasirandomly allocated to physicians in GIM, and thus, observed differences can be attributed to physician practice, not patient factors. We report the mean change in Hgb as a continuous outcome, and also percentage of patients who experienced a clinically significant reduction in Hgb, which was prespecified as at least 10 g/L. Statistical significance was determined using Chi-square tests for categorical variables, and Kruskall-Wallis tests for continuous variables. Results We included 65,507 hospital admissions. The mean volume of RBW ordered per patient per day significantly decreased from 2010 to 2016, for all percentiles (p<0.001 for all percentiles; as an example: 7.23cc in 2010 to 6.17cc in 2016 for patients admitted to physicians in the 25-50th percentile) (Figure 1). The mean volume of RBW ordered per patient per day significantly decreased from 2010 to 2016 in all but one hospital (Figure 2). However, the spread between the 10th and 90th percentile physicians did not change much between 2010 (1.77cc/patient/day) and 2016 (1.84 cc/patient/day). There was a dose-response relationship between MRP use of RBW and reductions in patient Hgb (Table 1). Compared to patients of MRPs in the lowest 10% of RBW use, patients of physicians in the highest 10% had a greater mean reduction in Hgb (4.93 g/L vs 3.34 g/L, p<0.001), and were more likely to have a clinically significant reduction in Hgb (23.1% vs. 18.7%, p<0.001). Conclusion This large, multi-centre cohort study demonstrated that greater use of RBW on GIM inpatients was associated with clinically significant reductions in Hgb. To our knowledge, this is the first study to rigorously demonstrate that greater use of RBW may be associated with clinically meaningful reductions in Hgb, independent of patient-level confounding. We further found that RBW use decreased overall with time, and in 6 out of 7 hospitals, between 2010 and 2017. However, the spread between 10th and 90th percentile physicians has not changed, suggesting that opportunities still exist to reduce RBW use at both the hospital and physician level. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.346
Threshold uncertainty score0.688

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.378
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.127 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicHealthcare cost, quality, practicesFrench-language works237,207