Prevalence of estimated GFR reporting among US clinical laboratories.
Prevalence of estimated GFR reporting among US clinical laboratories.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1053/j.ajkd.2008.05.023
复制
发表时间：
2008-10
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Narva AS
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Accetta NA;Gladstone EH;DiSogra C;Wright EC;Briggs M;Narva AS
常规实验室报告估计肾小球滤过率（eGFR）可能有助于临床医生发现肾脏疾病。目前全国临床实验室报告eGFR的流行程度尚不清楚，因此未常规报告eGFR与血清肌酐（SCr）结果的实验室情况的程度未被量化。观察分析。2006- 2007年全国肾脏疾病教育计划临床实验室调查通过邮件、网络和电话随访。从联邦临床实验室改进修订数据库中抽取的全国随机样本，6350个临床实验室，并按6个主要实验室类型/组分层。实验室报告SCr结果。报告eGFR值和SCr结果。报告eGFR的实验室百分比，以及报告SCr、报告方案、使用的eGFR公式和报告截止值的风格。在报告SCr的实验室中，38.4%报告eGFR（医生办公室25.8%；医院43.6%；独立医院38.9%；社区诊所47.2%；卫生公平/保险/公共卫生45.5%；其他43.2%）。医师办公室实验室报告的患病率低于其他实验室类型（p < 0.001）。在报告eGFR的实验室中，66.7%的实验室对所有成人SCr进行常规检测；71.6%的人使用肾脏疾病研究方程中的4变量饮食修正；45.3%的人使用“>60 mL/min/1.73 m2”的报告惯例。独立实验室最不可能常规报告eGFR (50.6%, p < 0.05)，最可能仅在特别要求时报告（45.4%,p < 0.05）。所有阶层的高容量实验室更有可能报告eGFR （p < 0.001）。实验室自我报告，联邦数据库没有实验室主任/经理（预期受访者）的姓名，假设联邦数据库的准确性用于样本目的。常规eGFR SCr报告尚未普及，各实验室的报告做法各不相同。
Routine laboratory reporting of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) may help clinicians detect kidney disease. The current national prevalence of eGFR reporting among clinical laboratories is unknown, thus the extent of the situation of laboratories not routinely reporting eGFR with serum creatinine (SCr) results is not quantified. Observational analysis. National Kidney Disease Education Program survey of clinical laboratory conducted in 2006-7 by mail, Web, and telephone follow up. A national random sample, 6,350 clinical laboratories, drawn from the Federal Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments database and stratified by six major laboratory types/groupings. Laboratory reports SCr results. Reporting eGFR values along with SCr results. Percent of laboratories reporting eGFR along with reporting SCr, reporting protocol, eGFR formula used, and style of reporting cutoff values. Among laboratories reporting SCr, 38.4% report eGFR (physician offices, 25.8%; hospitals, 43.6%; independents, 38.9%; community clinics, 47.2%; health fair/insurance/public health, 45.5%; others, 43.2%). Physician office laboratories have a reporting prevalence lower than other laboratory types (p < 0.001). Among laboratories reporting eGFR, 66.7% do so routinely with all adult SCr determinations; 71.6% use the 4-variable Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study equation; and 45.3% use the “>60 mL/min/1.73 m2” reporting convention. Independent laboratories are least likely to routinely report eGFR, (50.6%, p < .05) and most likely to report only when specifically requested (45.4%, p < 0.05). High-volume laboratories across all strata are more likely to report eGFR (p < 0.001). Self-reporting by laboratories, Federal database did not have names of laboratory directors/managers (intended respondents), assumed accuracy of Federal database for sample purposes. Routine eGFR reporting with SCr is not yet universal and laboratories vary in their reporting practices.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
2.6
作者：
Quartarolo, Jennifer M.;Thoelke, Mark;Schafers, Stephen J.
通讯作者：
Schafers, Stephen J.
影响因子：
--
作者：
Akbari, A;Swedko, PJ;Ooi, D
通讯作者：
Ooi, D
影响因子：
39.2
作者：
Levey, AS;Coresh, J;Eknoyan, G
通讯作者：
Eknoyan, G
影响因子：
11.1
作者：
Verhave, JC;Baljé-Volkers, CP;De Jong, PE
通讯作者：
De Jong, PE
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
RAO, JNK;SCOTT, AJ
通讯作者：
SCOTT, AJ