Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Published in Association with the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM)

Editor-in-Chief: Plebani, Mario

Ed. by Gillery, Philippe / Lackner, Karl J. / Lippi, Giuseppe / Melichar, Bohuslav / Payne, Deborah A. / Schlattmann, Peter / Tate, Jillian R.

12 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 3.556

CiteScore 2017: 2.34

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 1.114
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 1.188

Online
ISSN
1437-4331
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 56, Issue 6

Issues

Quality and future of clinical laboratories: the Vico’s whole cyclical theory of the recurring cycles

Mario PlebaniORCID iD: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0270-1711
Published Online: 2018-02-10 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2018-0009

Abstract

In the last few decades, laboratory medicine has undergone monumental changes, and laboratory technology, which has made enormous advances, now has new clinical applications thanks to the identification of a growing number of biomarkers and risk factors conducive to the promotion of predictive and preventive interventions that have enhanced the role of laboratory medicine in health care delivering. However, the paradigm shift in the past 50 years has led to a gap between laboratory and clinic, with an increased risk of inappropriateness in test request and interpretation, as well as the consolidation of analytical work in focused factories and megastructurers oriented only toward achieving greater volumes, decreasing cost per test and generating a vision of laboratory services as simple commodities. A careful historical revision of the changing models for delivering laboratory services in the United States leads to the prediction that there are several reasons for counteracting the vision of clinical laboratory as a commodity, and restoring the true nature of laboratory services as an integral part of the diagnosis and therapy process. The present study, which reports on internal and external drivers for change, proposes an integrated vision of quality in laboratory medicine.

Keywords: brain-to-brain loop; clinical laboratory; commodity; drivers for change; hospital-based model; quality

References

  • 1.

    Plebani M. Clinical laboratories: production industry or medical services? Clin Chem Lab Med 2015;53:995–1004.PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 2.

    Wright JR Jr. The politics underlying the provision of and changes in pathology and laboratory services in the United States during the roaring twenties. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2016;140:983–91.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 3.

    Strom CM. Changing trend in laboratory testing in the United States. Clin Lab Med 2012;32:651–64.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 4.

    Plebani M. Quality in laboratory medicine: 50 years on. Clin Biochem 2017;50:101–4.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 5.

    Adeli K. Laboratory medicine-a hidden treasure in healthcare. Clin Biochem 2017;50:645–7.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 6.

    Plebani M, EFLM task force on performance specifications for the extra-analytical phases. Performance specifications for the extra-analytical phases of laboratory testing: why and how. Clin Biochem 2017;50:550–4.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 7.

    Porter ME. A strategy for health care reform-toward a value-based system. N Engl J Med 2009;361:109–12.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 8.

    Plebani M. The changing face of clinical laboratories. Clin Chem Lab Med 1999;37:711–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 9.

    Conn RB. Clinical laboratories: profit center, production industry or patient-care resource? N Engl J Med 1978;298:422–7.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 10.

    Price CP, John AS, Christenson R, Scharnhorst V, Oellerich M, Jones P, et al. Leveraging the real value of laboratory medicine with the value proposition. Clin Chim Acta 2016;462:183–6.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 11.

    Plebani M, Lippi G. Is laboratory medicine a dying profession? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed. Clin Biochem 2010;43:939–41.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 12.

    Wright JR Jr. The American College of Surgeons, minimum standards for hospitals, and the provision of high-quality laboratory services. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2017;141:704–17.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 13.

    Davis L. Fellowship of surgeons: a history of the American College of Surgeons. Chicago, IL: American College of Surgeons, 1960.Google Scholar

  • 14.

    Hospital Information and Service Department, American College of Surgeons. A manual of hospital standardization. https://archive.org/details/Hospital Standardization Manual 1926. Published 1926. Accessed 15 Oct 2017.

  • 15.

    Vico G. The new science. New York: Cornell University Press Ithaca, 1948.Google Scholar

  • 16.

    Jones BA, Bekeris LG, Nakhleh RE, Walsh MK, Valenstein PN, College of American Pathologists. Physician satisfaction with clinical laboratory services: a College of American Pathologists Q-probes study of 138 institutions. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2009;133:38–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 17.

    McCall SJ, Souers RJ, Blond B, Massie L. Physician satisfaction with clinical laboratory services: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes Study of 81 Institutions. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2016;140:1098–103.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 18.

    Seaberg RS, Stallone RO, Statland BE. The role of total laboratory automation in a consolidated laboratory network. Clin Chem 2000;46:751–6.Google Scholar

  • 19.

    Plebani M, Panteghini M. Promoting clinical and laboratory interaction by harmonization. Clin Chim Acta 2014;432:15–21.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 20.

    Institute of Medicine. Improving diagnosis in health care. Washington, DC: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2015. Available at http://iom.nationalacademies.org/Reports/2015/Improving-Diagnosis-in-Healthcare.aspx.

  • 21.

    Dickerson JA, Fletcher AH, Procop G, Keren D, Singh IR, Garcia JJ, et al. Transforming laboratory utilization review into laboratory stewardship: guidelines by the PLUGS National Committee for Laboratory Stewardship. J Appl Lab Med 2017;2: 259–68.Google Scholar

  • 22.

    Morgan DJ, Malani P, Diekema DJ. Diagnostic stewardship- leveraging the laboratory to improve antimicrobial use. J Am Med Assoc 2017; 318:607–8.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 23.

    Messacar K, Parker SK, Todd JK, Dominguez SR. Implementation of rapid molecular infectious disease diagnostics: the role of diagnostic and antimicrobial stewardship. J Clin Microbiol 2017;55:715–23.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 24.

    Pelloso M, Basso D, Padoan A, Fogar P, Plebani M. Computer-based-limited and personalised education management maximise appropriateness of vitamin D, vitamin B12 and folate retesting. J Clin Pathol 2016;69:777–83.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 25.

    Eaton KP, Levy K, Soong C, Pahwa AK, Petrilli C, Ziemba JB. Evidence-based guidelines to eliminate repetitive laboratory testing. JAMA Intern Med 2017;177:1833–9.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 26.

    Piva E, Pelloso M, Penello L, Plebani M. Laboratory critical values: automated notification supports effective clinical decision making. Clin Biochem 2014;47:1163–8.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 27.

    Piva E, Sciacovelli L, Pelloso M, Plebani M. Performance specifications of critical results management. Clin Biochem 2017;50:617–21.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 28.

    Bartlett RC. Medical microbiology: quality costs and clinical relevance. New York, NY: Wiley, 1974.Google Scholar

  • 29.

    Dooris M. Expert voices for change: bridging the silos-towards healthy and sustainable settings for the 21st century. Health Place 2013;20:39–50.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 30.

    Porter ME. What is value in health care? N Engl J Med 2010;363:2477–81.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 31.

    Tahara DC, Green RP. Strategic re-design of team-based patient-focused health care services. Adv Health Care Manag 2014;16:3–22.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 32.

    Rockwell KL. Direct-to-consumer medical testing in the era of value-based care. J Am Med Assoc 2017;317:2485–6.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 33.

    Lovett KM, Mackey TK, Liang BA. Evaluating the evidence: direct-to-consumer screening tests advertised online. J Med Screen 2012;19:141–53.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 34.

    McGuire AL, Burke W. Health system implications of direct-to-consumer personal genome testing. Public Health Genomics 2011;14:53–8.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 35.

    Cosby K. Medical decision making. In: Croskerry P, Cosby K, Graber M, Singh H, editors. Diagnosis: interpreting the shadows. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press Taylo & Francis Group, 2017.Google Scholar

  • 36.

    Plebani M, Laposata M, Lundberg GD. The brain-to-brain loop concept for laboratory testing 40 years after its introduction. Am J Clin Pathol 2011;136:829–33.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 37.

    Srinivasan D, Desai NR. The impact of the transition from value to value on heart failure care: implications of novel payment models and quality improvement initiatives. J Cardiac Fail 2017;23:615–20.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 38.

    Bindman AB, Pronovost PJ, Asch DA. Funding innovation ina learning health care system. JAMA 2018;19:119–20.Google Scholar

  • 39.

    Herzlinger RE, Schleicher SM, Mullangi S. Health care delivery innovations that integrate care? Yes!: but integrating what? J Am Med Assoc 2016;315:1109–10.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 40.

    Hadker N, Garg S, Costanzo C, van der Helm W, Creeden J. Are there financial savings associated with supplementing current diagnostic practice for preeclampsia with a novel test? Learnings from a modeling analysis from a German payer perspective. Hypertens Pregnancy 2013;32:105–19.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 41.

    Di Martino D, Cetin I, Frusca T, Ferrazzi E, Fuse’ F, Gervasi MT, et al. Italian advisory board: sFlt-1/PlGF ratio and preeclampsia, state of the art and developments in diagnostic, therapeutic and clinical management. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2016;206:70–3.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 42.

    Lee J, Tollefson E, Daly M, Kielb E. A generalized health economic and outcomes research model for the evaluation of companion diagnostics and targeted therapies. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2013;13:361–70.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 43.

    The Centre for International Economics. The economic value of pathology: achieving better health, and better use of health resources. www.TheCIE.com.au. Accessed on 21 Dec 2017.

  • 44.

    Segal L, Dalton AC, Richardson J. Cost-effectiveness of the primary prevention of non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus. Health Promot Int 1998;13:197–209.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 45.

    Plebani M. Analytical quality: an unfinished journey. Clin Chem Lab Med 2018;56:357–359.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 46.

    Vogeser M, Seger C. Irregular analytical errors in diagnostic testing – a novel concept. Clin Chem Lab Med 2018;56:386–96.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 47.

    Clerico A, Belloni L, Carrozza C, Correale M, Dittadi R, Dotti C, et al. A Black Swan in clinical laboratory practice: the analytical error due to interferences in immunoassay methods. Clin Chem Lab Med 2018;56:397–402PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 48.

    Price CP, Wolstenholme J, McGinley P, St John A. Translational health economics: the key to accountable adoption of in vitro diagnostic technologies. Health Serv Manage Res 2017:951484817736727. doi:10.1177/0951484817736727. [Epub ahead of print].Google Scholar

  • 49.

    Misialek MJ. Valuing value: the changing role of pathologists. Am J Clin Pathol 2014;142:584–5.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 50.

    Plebani M. Towards a new paradigm in laboratory medicine: the five rights. Clin Chem Lab Med 2016;54:1881–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 51.

    Plebani M. Quality indicators to detect pre-analytical errors in laboratory testing. Clin Biochem Rev 2012;33:85–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • 52.

    Lippi G, Plebani M. The add value of laboratory diagnostics: the many reasons why decision-makers should actually care. J Lab Precis Med 2017;2:100.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

About the article

Received: 2018-01-04

Accepted: 2018-01-08

Published Online: 2018-02-10

Published in Print: 2018-05-24


Author contributions: The author has accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.

Research funding: None declared.

Employment or leadership: None declared.

Honorarium: None declared.

Competing interests: The funding organization(s) played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.


Citation Information: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM), Volume 56, Issue 6, Pages 901–908, ISSN (Online) 1437-4331, ISSN (Print) 1434-6621, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2018-0009.

Export Citation

©2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Ferruccio Ceriotti
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM), 2018, Volume 0, Number 0
[2]
Mario Plebani, Maria Stella Graziani, and Jillian R. Tate
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM), 2018, Volume 0, Number 0
[3]
Janne Cadamuro, Mercedes Ibarz, Michael Cornes, Mads Nybo, Elisabeth Haschke-Becher, Alexander von Meyer, Giuseppe Lippi, and Ana-Maria Simundic
Diagnosis, 2018, Volume 0, Number 0
[4]
Mario Plebani
Diagnosis, 2018, Volume 5, Number 2, Page 41

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in