Comparison of the time required for manual (visually read) and semi-automated POCT urinalysis and pregnancy testing with associated electronic medical record (EMR) transcription errors

Abstract

BackgroundPOCT urinalysis (UA) and urine pregnancy tests (UPT) are routinely performed in obstetrics and gynecology (Ob/Gyn) clinics by dipstick and pregnancy test kit methods respectively. In this study, we compared the time, efficiency and accuracy of these tests using manual, visually read methods and a semi-automated analyzer that was not interfaced to the EMR. MethodsWe prospectively enrolled 2525 patients at five Ob/Gyn clinics. Urine samples were tested using three different dipsticks for UA (2, 7 and 10 test pads) and the Sure-Vue™ urine pregnancy test kit. The samples were analyzed on the CLINITEK Status® Connect System and results compared for time taken and errors in results’ transcription. ResultsUsing the CLINITEK Status Connect System, average test time and average total test time for UA dipsticks 7 and 10 test pads was significantly less than the manual, visually read method (0.77 and 0.64 min, respectively; p < 0.001). The average test time for manual, visually read Chem 2 was significantly less than the CLINITEK Status Connect System (0.09 min; p = 0.005), but not the average total test time (0.08 min; p = 0.33). Average test time for a negative UPT using the CLINITEK Status Connect System was significantly greater (0.87 min; p < 0.001). We found a transcription error rate of 0.3–1.7% for UA results and none for UPT. About 8% of UA and 12% of UPT results were not documented in EMR. ConclusionThe CLINITEK Status Connect System was more efficient than the manual, visually read process and if interfaced with the EMR would eliminate errors and non-documentation of results.