Variability in Celiac Serology Testing by Provider Type: A Single-Center Experience.

Ankur Chugh, Stanley F Lo
{"title":"Variability in Celiac Serology Testing by Provider Type: A Single-Center Experience.","authors":"Ankur Chugh,&nbsp;Stanley F Lo","doi":"10.1097/PG9.0000000000000302","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To evaluate the ordering practices of celiac disease (CD) serologies by providers at a tertiary, academic, Children's Hospital and compare them to guidelines and best practices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed celiac serologies ordered in 2018 by provider type (pediatric gastrointestinal (GI) specialists, primary care providers (PCPs), and nonpediatric GI specialists), and identified causes for variability and nonadherence.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The antitissue transglutaminase antibody (tTG) IgA was ordered (n = 2504) most frequently by gastroenterologists (43%), endocrinologists (22%), and other (35%). Total IgA was ordered with tTG IgA for screening purposes in 81% of overall cases, but endocrinologists ordered it only 49% of the time. The tTG IgG was ordered infrequently (1.9%) compared with tTG IgA. Antideaminated gliadin peptide (DGP) IgA/IgG levels were also infrequently ordered (5.4%) compared with tTG IgA. The antiendomysial antibody was ordered sparingly (0.9%) compared with tTG IgA, but appropriately by providers with expertise in CD, similar to ordering for celiac genetics (0.8%). Of the celiac genetic tests, 15% were ordered in error. The positivity rate of the tTG IgA ordered by PCPs was 4.4%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The tTG IgA was appropriately ordered by all types of providers. Endocrinologists inconsistently ordered total IgA levels with screening labs. DGP IgA/IgG tests were not commonly ordered but were inappropriately ordered by one provider. The low number of ordered antiendomysial antibody and celiac genetic tests suggests under-utilization of the nonbiopsy approach. The positive yield of tTG IgA ordered by PCPs was higher compared with previous studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":17618,"journal":{"name":"JPGN Reports","volume":"4 2","pages":"e302"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/4c/54/pg9-4-e302.PMC10187855.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JPGN Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PG9.0000000000000302","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

To evaluate the ordering practices of celiac disease (CD) serologies by providers at a tertiary, academic, Children's Hospital and compare them to guidelines and best practices.

Methods: We analyzed celiac serologies ordered in 2018 by provider type (pediatric gastrointestinal (GI) specialists, primary care providers (PCPs), and nonpediatric GI specialists), and identified causes for variability and nonadherence.

Results: The antitissue transglutaminase antibody (tTG) IgA was ordered (n = 2504) most frequently by gastroenterologists (43%), endocrinologists (22%), and other (35%). Total IgA was ordered with tTG IgA for screening purposes in 81% of overall cases, but endocrinologists ordered it only 49% of the time. The tTG IgG was ordered infrequently (1.9%) compared with tTG IgA. Antideaminated gliadin peptide (DGP) IgA/IgG levels were also infrequently ordered (5.4%) compared with tTG IgA. The antiendomysial antibody was ordered sparingly (0.9%) compared with tTG IgA, but appropriately by providers with expertise in CD, similar to ordering for celiac genetics (0.8%). Of the celiac genetic tests, 15% were ordered in error. The positivity rate of the tTG IgA ordered by PCPs was 4.4%.

Conclusions: The tTG IgA was appropriately ordered by all types of providers. Endocrinologists inconsistently ordered total IgA levels with screening labs. DGP IgA/IgG tests were not commonly ordered but were inappropriately ordered by one provider. The low number of ordered antiendomysial antibody and celiac genetic tests suggests under-utilization of the nonbiopsy approach. The positive yield of tTG IgA ordered by PCPs was higher compared with previous studies.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同提供者类型的乳糜泻血清学检测的可变性:单中心经验。
目的:评价某三级学术儿童医院的乳糜泻(CD)血清学排序做法,并将其与指南和最佳做法进行比较。方法:我们分析了2018年按提供者类型(儿科胃肠道(GI)专家、初级保健提供者(pcp)和非儿科胃肠道专家)订购的乳糜泻血清学,并确定了差异和不依从性的原因。结果:抗组织转谷氨酰胺酶抗体(tTG) IgA (n = 2504)被胃肠科医生(43%)、内分泌科医生(22%)和其他科医生(35%)订购最多。在81%的病例中,总IgA和tTG IgA被用于筛查目的,但内分泌学家只在49%的情况下使用了总IgA。与tTG IgA相比,tTG IgG的订购频率较低(1.9%)。与tTG IgA相比,抗脱氨麦胶蛋白肽(DGP) IgA/IgG水平也不常见(5.4%)。与tTG IgA相比,抗肌内膜抗体的订购较少(0.9%),但由具有乳糜泻专业知识的提供者适当订购,类似于乳糜泻遗传学订购(0.8%)。在乳糜泻基因检测中,有15%是错误的。pcp订购的tTG IgA阳性率为4.4%。结论:各类医疗服务提供者对tTG IgA的订购是合理的。内分泌学家与筛查实验室要求的总IgA水平不一致。DGP IgA/IgG检测不常被订购,但被一个提供者不恰当地订购。有序抗肌内膜抗体和乳糜泻基因检测的低数量提示未充分利用非活检方法。与以往的研究相比,pcp订购的tTG IgA阳性产率更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
‘You can be as vigilant as you can, yet they make their way in’: A descriptive study of parent and caregiver perspectives towards keeping children safe from button batteries Co‐occurrence of collagenous gastrointestinal disease in siblings in early childhood: New insight into a rare condition Impact of gender, race, and age of onset on the phenotype and comorbidities of pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis Pediatric eosinophilic gastritis treated with benralizumab: A case report B cell depletion for autoimmune liver diseases: A retrospective review of indications and outcomes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1