Evaluation of Antinuclear Antibody and Subserology Reflex Testing for the Diagnosis of Systemic Autoimmune Rheumatic Disorders in an Academic Teaching Hospital.
Delicia Duff, Niti Vyas, Janet Enderle, Rajkumar Rajendran
{"title":"Evaluation of Antinuclear Antibody and Subserology Reflex Testing for the Diagnosis of Systemic Autoimmune Rheumatic Disorders in an Academic Teaching Hospital.","authors":"Delicia Duff, Niti Vyas, Janet Enderle, Rajkumar Rajendran","doi":"10.1093/labmed/lmac157","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to examine appropriate utilization of antinuclear antibody (ANA) screening tests with follow-up subserology tests (reflex testing) for diagnosing systemic autoimmune rheumatic disorder (SARD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective chart review of 3003 SARD-test orders at an academic teaching hospital from January to December 2019. Testing patterns were categorized as American College of Rheumatology (ACR)-recommended reflex testing, panel testing, or single subserology testing. We described testing patterns, assessed their diagnostic accuracy, and explored factors associated with reflex testing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Reflex testing accounted for 79.7% of SARD test-ordering, whereas improper testing (panel or single subserology) accounted for the other 20.3%. Reflex testing was associated with significantly more SARD diagnoses than improper testing (P = .004). Testing patterns were significantly associated with race/ethnicity (P = .008), with reflex testing being less frequent than improper testing in Hispanics and Whites.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In summary, one-fifth (20.3%) of testing patterns for suspected SARD did not follow the ACR-recommended guidelines for using reflex testing. Use of reflex testing was associated with an increased frequency of SARD diagnosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":17951,"journal":{"name":"Laboratory medicine","volume":"54 5","pages":"489-494"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laboratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/labmed/lmac157","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to examine appropriate utilization of antinuclear antibody (ANA) screening tests with follow-up subserology tests (reflex testing) for diagnosing systemic autoimmune rheumatic disorder (SARD).
Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review of 3003 SARD-test orders at an academic teaching hospital from January to December 2019. Testing patterns were categorized as American College of Rheumatology (ACR)-recommended reflex testing, panel testing, or single subserology testing. We described testing patterns, assessed their diagnostic accuracy, and explored factors associated with reflex testing.
Results: Reflex testing accounted for 79.7% of SARD test-ordering, whereas improper testing (panel or single subserology) accounted for the other 20.3%. Reflex testing was associated with significantly more SARD diagnoses than improper testing (P = .004). Testing patterns were significantly associated with race/ethnicity (P = .008), with reflex testing being less frequent than improper testing in Hispanics and Whites.
Conclusion: In summary, one-fifth (20.3%) of testing patterns for suspected SARD did not follow the ACR-recommended guidelines for using reflex testing. Use of reflex testing was associated with an increased frequency of SARD diagnosis.