|
Professor Dr
Lothar Thomas
Kirschbaumweg 8, 60489 Frankfurt
E-mail: th-books@t-online.de
Download as a
PDF here
Critical limits of laboratory
results need urgent notification to the clinician because they are
an indicator of a critical or even life-threatening condition of
the patient.
The publications about this topic
are mainly from the 1970s. Since then, many laboratory methods have
been improved, new parameters have been added, and there have also
been changes in the evaluation and treatment of diseases.
Against this background and at the
request of the American Medical Association, J.G. Kost [1]
conducted a survey on critical parameters in the USA in 1990 and
Howanitz et al. [2] in 2002. The spectrum of critical parameters
reported in these publications does not meet the requirements of
laboratory medicine in every respect.
I have therefore put together a new
list of qualitative and quantitative parameters. If you think there
are parameters that should perhaps be added or deleted, limits,
which need changing, or notes that need to be amended, your
suggestions would be most welcome.
Quantitative laboratory test results for the blood and
extravascular body fluids are indicators, for example, of organic
disease, metabolic disorders, diseases of the haematopoietic
system, disturbances of haemostasis, abnormalities of the endocrine
system, activation or insufficiency of the immune system,
inflammation, infections, and autoimmune processes.
High detection sensitivity, a wide
measurement range, and good to acceptable precision and accuracy,
allow blood parameters to be determined in concentration ranges,
which indicate that the patient is in acute danger or even a danger
to others. The laboratory must report such results to the treating
physician immediately. For this to happen, there must be an
agreement between the treating physician and the laboratory as to
what constitutes a critical result that needs to be reported to
him. The parameters chosen and the critical limits depend
essentially on the disease prevalence expected in the clinic or
practice.
The laboratory should not report a
critical result to the treating physician until it has been
confirmed by a second determination in the same sample.
The laboratory test value should be
ascertained by a competent member of the laboratory (laboratory
doctor, clinical chemist, senior medical laboratory technician)
who should discuss the result with the treating physician.
This is because influences and
interference factors in the preanalytical phase, e.g. sample
collection for glucose measurement using a venous catheter that had
been used for glucose infusion, are not infrequently the cause of
seemingly critical values. Such cases are usually clarified by the
testing of another, properly collected sample.
The specified parameters and limits
are taken partly from [1]. The others are based on 25 years�
experience as a doctor for laboratory medicine working in a
hospital.
References:
- Kost, GJ. Critical limits for urgent clinician notification at
US medical centers. JAMA 1990; 263: 704-7
- Howanitz PJ, Steindel SJ, Heard NV. Laboratory critical values,
policies and procedures. A College of American Pathologists
Q-probes study in 623 institutions. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2002; 126:
663-9.
|