Analysis of Laboratory Critical Values During COVID-19 Pandemic at Tertiary Hospital in Saudi Arabia
Mohammed Jeraiby
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/ijgm.s449505
IF: 2.145
2024-02-03
International Journal of General Medicine
Abstract:Mohammed A Jeraiby Department of Medical Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia Correspondence: Mohammed A Jeraiby, Department of Medical Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine, Jazan University, Jazan, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Tel +966-544589494, Email ; Purpose: One of the most important aspects of post-analytical laboratory activity is the notification of critical results. Therefore, the aim of this study was to illustrate and analyze the prevalence of critical result values of our clinical laboratory investigations during the pandemic stages of coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) and other research pre-pandemic stages. Methods: The seven-month study was conducted between May 2020 and November 2020. Laboratory data of critical results were collected in this retrospective cohort. Results: In total, 221,384 routine tests and 84,451 STAT tests were performed in our clinical laboratory. Of the 3183 (1.44%) tests result was identified as having Critical values, consisting of 2220 (69.74%) and 963 (30.25%) tests in biochemistry and hematology assays. Among the tests with critical values, 39.6% of which were from emergency department (ED) as STAT testing (1262) and 60.3% (1921) as TAT testing. Testing was found in routine inpatients and outpatients, 58% and 2.3%, respectively, and the most frequent parameter notified was sodium. Conclusion: In our practice, we observed that the higher level of frequency of critical values results is related to inpatients, contradicting several researchers reporting that the higher percentages of critical values were from ED. Keywords: critical values limits, critical values notification, STAT tests, TAT tests, coronavirus-19 Graphical A critical value is in accordance with the definition given, "laboratory test result indicating a pathophysiologic state that deviates from normal so much that it could be fatal if medical intervention is not done quickly, and for which an effective action could be implemented." This concept was first defined in 1972, and it is now widely used all across the world. 1 Critical value reporting is now one of the prerequisites for accreditation by lab accrediting organizations. Additionally, through the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), which has been approved as a standard of Good Laboratory Practice, the rapid communication of a critical value as a particular need has been acknowledged and applied globally. 2–5 Guidelines for reporting critical results have been released by several organizations, including the British Royal College of Pathologists. 6 These organizations have specific standards for laboratory critical values. It provides policies and procedures focused on the identification of critical values with rapid communication of a critical value, including the use of telephone calls and call centers in reporting as well as a list of key values that can help practitioners comprehend tests that could need quick attention. 2–5 According to the literature, there is no agreement on the critical value thresholds or the biomarkers that are most likely to produce them. The list of biomarkers and their critical value limits, which each laboratory should develop, must be agreed upon by doctors. 7–10 Additionally, separate lists are required for various study groups because key values for neonatal, pediatric, and adult care patients would vary. 11 The first step in communicating critical values is the identification of abnormal results by a laboratory staff. For automated lab, middleware instrument or Laboratory information system (LIS) will alert laboratory staff about critical values. In most cases, the staff is the performing technologist. For inpatients and outpatients, the mean time delay to report critical levels is 6 h and 14 min, respectively, 15 to 30 min is the reasonable and acceptable time. 12,13 Globally, clinical laboratories have faced numerous challenges as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Several laboratory tests may aid clinicians in predicting results and preventing or diagnosing COVID-19 complications, such as IL6, CRP, and white blood cell subset counts, may help predict the severity of COVID-19. D-dimer, a blood coagulation test, is also linked to COVID-19 severity. Cardiac troponin and proBNP (cardiac markers) may aid in the diagnosis and management of COVID-19-related heart problems. Other laboratory tests related with severe COVID-19 include ferritin, LDH, transaminases, and serum albumin. 14 That is, we assumed that the rates and characteristics, as well as the impact of COVID-19 in most laboratory tests probably varied from before the pandemic. Thus, this study was conducted to illustrate and analyze th -Abstract Truncated-
medicine, general & internal