Dataset of test volume and tests repeated for complete blood count and electrolyte panels from hospitals in a Canadian province in 2018

Abstract

All laboratory tests performed within the province of Alberta in Canada are captured by three Laboratory Information Systems (LIS; Millennium, Sunquest and Meditech), which comprise the provincial Consolidated Laboratory Data Repository (CLDR). The following secondary laboratory data for electrolyte panel (EP) and complete blood count (CBC) test panels performed in emergency room (ER) and inpatient settings were collected from January 1 – December 31, 2018: total test panel volume, total number of test panels repeated, number of test panels repeated within the 24 hour period, test result, date of testing, time of test, and patient Provincial Health Number (PHN). Patient PHN were used as a linking variable to match subsequent tests performed on the same patient. The first time a test was recorded per patient was defined as the “index test”. If the same test panel was performed within a 24-h period following the index test for the patient, data for the repeated test panel was also collected. The index test was defined as “normal” or “abnormal” according to established laboratory normal values and laboratory test reference ranges. For CBCs, we considered the panel to be abnormal if any of the hematocrit (Hct), hemoglobin (Hgb), mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration (MCHC), mean corpuscular volume (MCV), platelet (PLT), red blood cell (RBC), red cell distribution width (RDW) or white blood cell (WBC) values were outside the normal laboratory reference range. For electrolyte panels, we considered the panel to be abnormal if any of the chloride (Cl), potassium (K), and sodium (Na) were outside of the normal laboratory reference range. All EP results were from clinical chemistry analyzers only. The reuse potential of this dataset can allow other jurisdictions in Canada to compare their redundant repeat testing in their hospital settings with this dataset as a benchmark. This article was submitted via another Elsevier journal as a co-submission (“Inappropriate repeat testing of complete blood count (CBC) and electrolytes in inpatients from Alberta, Canada” [1]), and readers should refer to the co-submission article for interpretation of the results. Keywords: Laboratory utilization, Repeat testing, Complete blood count, Electrolyte panel, Laboratory medicine, Health informatics