The diagnostic accuracy and utility of a B-type natriuretic peptide test in a community population of patients with suspected heart failure.

BACKGROUND: National guidelines suggest the use of natriuretic peptides in suspected heart failure but there have been no studies comparing assays in primary care. AIM: To test and compare the diagnostic accuracy and utility of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal B-type natriuretic peptide (NT proBNP) in diagnosing heart failure due to left ventricular systolic dysfunction in patients with suspected heart failure referred by GPs to one-stop diagnostic clinics. DESIGN OF STUDY: Community cohort, prospective, diagnostic accuracy study. SETTING: One-stop diagnostic clinics in Darlington Memorial and Bishop Auckland General Hospitals and general practices in South Durham. SUBJECTS: Two hundred and ninety-seven consecutive patients with symptoms and signs suggestive of heart failure referred from general practice. METHOD: The study measured sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV), and area under receiver operating characteristic curve for BNP (near patient assay) and NT proBNP (laboratory assay) in diagnosis of heart failure due to left ventricular systolic dysfunction. The NPV of both assays was determined as a potential method of reducing the number of referrals for echocardiography. RESULTS: One hundred and fourteen of the 297 patients had left ventricular systolic dysfunction (38%). At the manufacturer's recommended cut-off of 100 pg/ml BNP gave a NPV of 82%. BNP performed better at a cut-off of 40 pg/ml with a NPV of 88%. At a cut-off of 150 pg/ml, NT proBNP gave a NPV of 92%. Using cut-offs of 40 pg/ml and 150 pg/ml for BNP and NT pro-BNP, respectively, could have prevented 24% and 25% of referrals to the clinic, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this setting, NT pro-BNP performed marginally better than BNP, and would be easier to use practically in primary care. A satisfactory cut-off has been identified, which needs validating in general practice. NT pro-BNP could be used to select referrals to a heart failure clinic or for echocardiography. This process needs testing in real-life general practice.

Managing demand for laboratory tests: a laboratory toolkit.

Healthcare budgets worldwide are facing increasing pressure to reduce costs and improve efficiency, while maintaining quality. Laboratory testing has not escaped this pressure, particularly since pathology investigations cost the National Health Service £2.5 billion per year. Indeed, the Carter Review, a UK Department of Health-commissioned review of pathology services in England, estimated that 20% of this could be saved by improving pathology services, despite an average annual increase of 8%-10% in workload. One area of increasing importance is managing the demands for pathology tests and reducing inappropriate requesting. The Carter Review estimated that 25% of pathology tests were unnecessary, representing a huge potential waste. Certainly, the large variability in levels of requesting between general practitioners suggests that inappropriate requesting is widespread. Unlocking the key to this variation and implementing measures to reduce inappropriate requesting would have major implications for patients and healthcare resources alike. This article reviews the approaches to demand management. Specifically, it aims to (a) define demand management and inappropriate requesting, (b) assess the drivers for demand management, (c) examine the various approaches used, illustrating the potential of electronic requesting and (d) provide a wider context. It will cover issues, such as educational approaches, information technology opportunities and challenges, vetting, duplicate request identification and management, the role of key performance indicators, profile composition and assessment of downstream impact of inappropriate requesting. Currently, many laboratories are exploring demand management using a plethora of disparate approaches. Hence, this review seeks to provide a 'toolkit' with the view to allowing laboratories to develop a standardised demand management strategy.

Hypertriglyceridaemia in diabetes.

Mild hypertriglyceridaemia is common in diabetes, but patients with newly presenting or poorly controlled diabetes may have a quantitatively different syndrome of gross hypertriglyceridaemia, which should be treated by optimising glycaemic control before use of lipid lowering drugs.