WO2002003077A1 - Systeme d'examen clinique - Google Patents

Systeme d'examen clinique Download PDF

Info

Publication number
WO2002003077A1
WO2002003077A1 PCT/JP2001/005716 JP0105716W WO0203077A1 WO 2002003077 A1 WO2002003077 A1 WO 2002003077A1 JP 0105716 W JP0105716 W JP 0105716W WO 0203077 A1 WO0203077 A1 WO 0203077A1
Authority
WO
WIPO (PCT)
Prior art keywords
retest
inspection
test
necessity
result
Prior art date
Application number
PCT/JP2001/005716
Other languages
English (en)
Japanese (ja)
Inventor
Satoshi Mitsuyama
Kazuyuki Shimada
Hitoshi Matsuo
Akira Saito
Original Assignee
Hitachi, Ltd.
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Hitachi, Ltd. filed Critical Hitachi, Ltd.
Publication of WO2002003077A1 publication Critical patent/WO2002003077A1/fr

Links

Classifications

    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
    • G06Q10/10—Office automation; Time management
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G01—MEASURING; TESTING
    • G01N—INVESTIGATING OR ANALYSING MATERIALS BY DETERMINING THEIR CHEMICAL OR PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
    • G01N35/00—Automatic analysis not limited to methods or materials provided for in any single one of groups G01N1/00 - G01N33/00; Handling materials therefor
    • G01N35/00584—Control arrangements for automatic analysers
    • G01N35/00594—Quality control, including calibration or testing of components of the analyser
    • G01N35/00603—Reinspection of samples
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G16—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR SPECIFIC APPLICATION FIELDS
    • G16H—HEALTHCARE INFORMATICS, i.e. INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR THE HANDLING OR PROCESSING OF MEDICAL OR HEALTHCARE DATA
    • G16H10/00—ICT specially adapted for the handling or processing of patient-related medical or healthcare data
    • G16H10/40—ICT specially adapted for the handling or processing of patient-related medical or healthcare data for data related to laboratory analysis, e.g. patient specimen analysis
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G01—MEASURING; TESTING
    • G01N—INVESTIGATING OR ANALYSING MATERIALS BY DETERMINING THEIR CHEMICAL OR PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
    • G01N35/00—Automatic analysis not limited to methods or materials provided for in any single one of groups G01N1/00 - G01N33/00; Handling materials therefor
    • G01N35/02—Automatic analysis not limited to methods or materials provided for in any single one of groups G01N1/00 - G01N33/00; Handling materials therefor using a plurality of sample containers moved by a conveyor system past one or more treatment or analysis stations
    • G01N35/04—Details of the conveyor system
    • G01N2035/046—General conveyor features
    • G01N2035/0467—Switching points ("aiguillages")
    • G01N2035/0472—Switching points ("aiguillages") for selective recirculation of carriers

Definitions

  • the present invention relates to a clinical test system, and more particularly to a retest necessity determination method for determining whether a retest is necessary based on test results.
  • an abnormal value is measured as a result of a test, it is determined whether the test value of the subject is really abnormal or an abnormal value due to a measurement defect (e.g., a device error or human error). If the possibility of measurement failure is low, the test result is reported to the clinic as correct, and if the possibility of measurement failure is high, a retest is performed. The need for retesting was determined by the laboratory technician based on past experience, referring to the combination of test values and the results of the previous test for the patient (recipient).
  • a measurement defect e.g., a device error or human error
  • re-examination necessity means a single item check, a previous value check, and an inter-item check are known as typical methods.
  • a single item check for example, a technique disclosed in Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. HEI 5-151282 is known. This technology sets a reference range for each test item according to gender, age, and pregnant woman, and if the test value exceeds this reference range, Report as a result.
  • Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 7-271873 describes a method of providing two types of reference ranges for each inspection item, an abnormal value range and a panic value range.
  • a delta check described in Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 5-151282 and a cumulative delta check described in Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 11-92665 are known. Have been.
  • a reference value is set for the difference between the previous value and the current value for each inspection item, and an error is reported for ⁇ where the difference between the previous value and the current value exceeds the reference value.
  • the standard deviation within an individual (the standard deviation of the test value for each test item for the same patient and examinee) is determined for each test item, and the difference between the previous value and the current value is calculated. Calculate the ratio to the standard deviation.
  • An abnormality is detected by providing a reference value to the value obtained by adding the above ratio obtained for each inspection item.
  • a reference value is set for a ratio between items, and a method of judging abnormality or a plurality of inspection items are used.
  • a method is known in which a logical operation expression is defined and an abnormality is determined based on the truth of the logical operation expression. Disclosure of the invention
  • the determination of the necessity of automatic re-inspection is generally carried out by using a reference value or a judgment logic so that there is no oversight of the inspection result to be re-inspected (missing detection). In many cases, a detection result that does not actually need to be re-examined is used as a criterion for judging the necessity of re-examination.
  • a laboratory technician checks again the test results determined to be necessary by the automatic retest necessity judgment, and extracts the test results that really need to be retested. Work is required. In order to save labor for inspection technicians, a more accurate method for determining whether reexamination is necessary is needed.
  • the present invention has been made in view of the above circumstances, and realizes a more accurate automatic retest necessity determination, and can easily optimize a reference value and a logic used in the retest necessity determination. It aims to provide a system.
  • FIG. 1 is a diagram showing one configuration example of a clinical test system to which the present invention can be applied.
  • FIG. 2 is a diagram showing another example of the configuration of the clinical test system to which the present invention can be applied.
  • FIG. 3 is a diagram showing still another example of the configuration of the clinical test system to which the present invention can be applied.
  • FIG. 4 is a diagram showing a basic block configuration of the inspection server according to the present invention.
  • FIG. 5 is a diagram for explaining one embodiment of the principle of optimization of the retest necessity determination logic according to the present invention.
  • FIG. 6 is a diagram for explaining another embodiment of the principle of optimality of the retest necessity determination logic according to the present invention.
  • FIG. 7 is a diagram showing a flowchart of a process of optimizing the retest necessity determination logic according to FIG.
  • FIG. 8 is a diagram showing a flowchart of the process of optimizing the retest necessity determination logic according to FIG.
  • FIG. 9 is a diagram illustrating an example of a parameter such as a reference value used in the retest necessity determination logic according to the present invention and a logical expression describing the determination logic.
  • FIG. 10 is a diagram showing one example of a screen configuration for displaying the inspection result and the result of the necessity of re-inspection on the display of the inspection client according to the present invention.
  • FIG. 11 is a diagram showing another example of the screen configuration for displaying the inspection result and the re-examination necessity determination result on the display of the inspection client according to the present invention.
  • FIG. 1 to 3 are diagrams showing a configuration example of a clinical test system to which the present invention can be applied.
  • an analyzer server 20, an inspection server 30, and an inspection client 40 are connected to a LAN 50 installed in a hospital or an inspection room.
  • a personal computer or the like can be used as each of the servers 20 and 30 and the inspection client 40.
  • the first inspection device 11, the second inspection device 12, and the third inspection device 13 are further connected to the LAN 50.
  • the analysis device server 20 controls each inspection device, performs necessary processing such as analysis on the inspection result output from each inspection device, and transmits information to the inspection server 30 via the LAN 50. send.
  • the inspection server 30 accumulates information such as the obtained inspection result, and determines whether or not the inspection result requires re-examination.
  • the inspection client 40 receives the inspection results accumulated in the inspection server 30 and the inspection server 30. It is possible to refer to information such as the necessity of the determined retest.
  • the inspection result for the inspection that is not automated can be input using the inspection client 40. In this case, the input data such as inspection results
  • Figure 2 shows the hospital 500 and the decision logic learning facility where the system described in Figure 1 was built.
  • a learning server 60 is installed in the court learning facility 550, and the learning server 60 is connected to a communication line 540 via a first communication means 610.
  • the inspection server 30 is connected to the communication line 540 via the second communication means 620.
  • the inspection server 30 and the learning server 60 can transmit and receive data via the communication line 540.
  • the communication line 540 various lines capable of data communication can be used, and for example, a telephone line can be used.
  • the first communication means 6 10 and the second communication means 6 20 appropriate communication means according to the type of line is used.
  • a modem can be used as the first communication means 610 and the second communication means 6200.
  • the learning server 60 it is possible to leave to the learning server 60 the optimization of the criterion for judging the necessity of the retest for the test result performed by the test server 30. Therefore, since the learning server 60 can perform the optimization using the data of other hospitals connected to the communication line 540, a more complete optimization can be expected than the system of FIG.
  • FIG. 3 is an example of a form in which each of the hospitals 5200 and 5300 connected via a communication line 5400 uses the inspection center 5100 in which the system described in FIG.
  • Each hospital is provided with a test result reference terminal 70, which allows the user to know the test results for the requested test object. According to this example, each hospital can perform a test including a more sophisticated retest while reducing capital investment.
  • the present invention can be applied to any of the embodiments, The retest necessity determination by the test server 30 can be further improved.
  • FIG. 4 shows a basic block diagram of the configuration of the inspection server 30 according to the present invention.
  • 100 is a system path.
  • 101 is CPU.
  • Numeral 102 is a database, which is data such as initial test results 1 1 1, re-test necessity judgment results 1 1 4 or re-test results 1 1 5, re-test execution information 1 1 2, diagnostic information 1 2 1, Various information such as contract information 1 2 2, request information 1 2 3 or re-examination necessity determination logic 1 16, re-examination necessity judgment reference value 1 18, and re-examination necessity judgment processing 1 1 3
  • Execution programs for re-test necessity determination logic optimization processing 117, disease candidate estimation processing 124, and the like are stored.
  • Reference numeral 103 denotes a RAM, which is a memory area used as a work area for executing various processes.
  • Reference numeral 104 denotes an input / output interface for inputting various information such as test result input, diagnostic information input, retest execution information input, contract information input, and various information such as test result output and retest results. Is output.
  • This embodiment enumerates data and processing programs as functions that the inspection server 30 should have, and does not cover all of them.
  • the re-examination necessity determination logic optimization processing and the like are executed by the decision logic learning facility 550, and the inspection server 30 cooperates with the re-examination logic. Will be promoted.
  • a, b, and c are constants, which are recorded together with the expression (1) in the database re-examination necessity determination logic 116 of FIG.
  • the initial value of this value uses data collected in advance. Use the power to set the optimal value, or set the value based on the engineer's past experience. In this case, since the optimal value differs depending on the characteristics of the patient at each hospital (what kind of disease is most common) and the conditions of the test method, test equipment, reagents, etc., it is not possible to optimize for each hospital. Of course.
  • test value x and the test value y are set on the horizontal axis and the vertical axis, respectively, and the distribution of the test values is indicated by a data group 920 indicated by X and a data group 940 indicated by ⁇ .
  • the retest necessity judgment result 1 14 is recorded as “retest required”, and for the data group 940 indicated by 4, the retest necessity judgment result 1 1 4 records "No need to retest".
  • a retest is performed on each sample of the data group 920.
  • the specimen will be unsuitable as a specimen after a long period of time, so this retest should be performed as soon as the first test result is obtained.
  • the technician may review whether or not reexamination is actually necessary, and omit those that are judged to be unnecessary.
  • the results of the retest are shown in Fig. 5 (b).
  • the data group indicated by a thick X in FIG. 5 (b) indicates a data group in which the results of the retest did not differ significantly from the results of the initial test. In other words, the same result is obtained even if the retest is performed, that is, the retest is useless. These data will be recorded again in the Judgment of Necessity of Re-examination.
  • the specimens in the data group indicated by X surrounded by a broken line with the original thickness indicate that the test value changed to the position of ⁇ indicating the corresponding relationship by the broken line with an arrow as a result of the retest. In other words, the initial inspection of these specimens was unreliable due to some abnormalities and was confirmed by re-inspection, resulting in data within the range of the inspection value, and it can be evaluated that the determination that re-inspection was necessary was appropriate.
  • the re-test necessity determination logic optimization process 1 17 includes the re-test necessity judgment result 1 1 4 From the distribution, it is possible to change the straight line 950, which is the threshold of the necessity of retest, to the straight line 960 shown by the equation (2). The content of the expression (2) is adopted as a correction of the judgment recorded in the judgment 1 16 of the necessity of reexamination.
  • the retest according to the present invention and the evaluation of the results may not exactly correspond to the results obtained by the technician reviewing whether or not the retest is actually necessary, but the present invention
  • the burden on the operator and the burden on the technician can be reduced, and more reasonable reexamination necessity determination logic can be obtained.
  • FIG. 6 (a) is data showing the same initial inspection results as FIG. 5 (a).
  • the specimens in the data group indicated by X are retested because they are judged to be necessary for retesting. In this case, too, the specimen will be unsuitable as a specimen after a long period of time, so this retest should be performed as soon as the first result is obtained.
  • the re-test necessity judgment result 1 14 is re-examined from the change in the value obtained by comparing the re-test result with the first result among the data of the re-test necessity judgment result 1 14 Was evaluated to be appropriate, and the straight line 950 that was judged to be necessary for retesting from the distribution of the original test values that were evaluated to be appropriate for retesting was corrected to the straight line 970 shown in equation (3), It is determined again whether or not it is necessary to re-examine the past data with a straight line that has been corrected to a predetermined range.
  • the content of the expression (3) is adopted as a modification of the judgment necessity logic recorded in the retest necessity judgment logic 116.
  • the retest according to the present invention and the evaluation of the results may not exactly match the results obtained by the technician reviewing whether or not the original test results actually require a retest.
  • the burden on the subject and the burden on the technician can be reduced, and a more reasonable retest necessity determination logic can be obtained.
  • this example is not advantageous in terms of reducing the cost of re-examination, it can be said that it is possible to realize re-examination evaluation without oversight.
  • FIG. 7 is a flowchart showing the above-described processing and the optimization processing of FIG. 5 in an organized manner.
  • a test is performed on all specimens for predetermined items (step 201).
  • This inspection result is input via the input / output interface 104 and stored in the initial inspection result 111 of the database 102 (step 202). Mochi Of course, some of these data are automatically input from the analyzer 20 and some are input manually by a laboratory technician.
  • the necessity judgment reference value 118 and the retest necessity judgment logic 116 are read into the RAMI 03 (steps 203 and 204), and the retest necessity judgment is executed for each sample according to the retest necessity judgment logic (step 205).
  • retest required is recorded in the retest necessity judgment result 114 (step 206).
  • retest not performed is recorded in the retest execution information 112 (step 207).
  • a retest is performed (step 208), and “retest execution” is recorded in the retest information 112 (step 209).
  • a retest result is input (step 210). Based on the magnitude of the difference between the input retest result and the initial test result, it is determined whether or not the sample really needs to be retested (step 211).
  • retest unnecessary is recorded in the retest necessity determination result 114 (step 213).
  • the reexamination necessity determination logic optimization processing 117 is executed with reference to the record of the reexamination necessity determination result 114 and the reexamination execution information 112 (step 214).
  • the retest necessity logic is modified according to the result (step 215).
  • FIG. 8 is a flowchart showing the above-described processing and the optimization processing of FIG. 6 in an organized manner.
  • the processing up to step 205 for executing the determination of the necessity of retest for each sample according to the retest necessity determination logic is the same.
  • “retest required” is recorded in the retest necessity result 114 (step 206), and the retest is performed (step 208).
  • the data that has been judged to be unnecessary for retesting is evaluated for how far away from the identification boundary that separates the samples that need to be retested from those that do not. (Step 220).
  • retest required is recorded in the retest necessity judgment result 114 (step 206).
  • “retest not performed” is recorded in the retest execution information 112 (step 207).
  • retest is performed (step 208), and “retest performed” is recorded in the retest information 112 (step 209).
  • the retest result is input (Step 210). Based on the magnitude of the difference between the input retest result and the initial test result, it is determined whether a retest is necessary (step 211).
  • Step 211 For the sample determined not to require retest, “retest unnecessary” is recorded in the retest necessity judgment result 114 (step 211).
  • the reexamination necessity determination logic optimization processing 117 is executed with reference to the record of the reexamination necessity determination result 114 and the reexamination execution information 112 (step 214).
  • the reexamination necessity determination logic is modified according to the result. (Steps 2 15).
  • the embodiment described in FIG. 6 and FIG. 8 increases the number of retesting targets compared with the embodiment described in FIG. 5 and FIG. 7, and thus is disadvantageous in terms of simply narrowing down to those requiring retesting. However, it is advantageous from the viewpoint of preventing accidental overlooking of the retest target.
  • V is the darkness value of the judgment, and 0.5 is set as the initial value.
  • ⁇ 8 which is equivalent to Fig. 5 and Fig. 7, is optimized by learning the neural network using the data of re-requiring and re-requiring recorded in step 2 Can be
  • step 220 instead of the condition of t ⁇ —0.1, for example, s ⁇ 0.4.
  • the detection near the discrimination boundary can be performed by detecting the inspection value when the neuura network outputs a value slightly lower than the initial value of V (0.5 in this case) (here, 0.4). The value can be determined to be a retest.
  • the boundary for determining whether or not reexamination is necessary on a plane with X and y as axes is a straight line.
  • the discrimination boundary is a curve, more accurate retest determination can be performed.
  • the diagnostic information 122 records the results of a doctor's diagnosis, information on medication, and the like, and can be used to determine whether a retest is necessary. For example, even if a patient's blood glucose level is higher than normal, if the patient has already been diagnosed with diabetes, it is judged that the possibility of a measurement error is low. be able to. In addition, when the diagnosis of hyperlipidemia is made, the tendency of the test value peculiar to the type of the disease is shown, such as a high value of cholesterol and triglyceride. Therefore, by using the information on the diagnosis, it is possible to appropriately judge the possibility of measurement error.
  • the disease is exemplified as the information regarding the diagnosis
  • information other than the disease name may be used. For example, taking certain medications may result in high test values, Alternatively, for ⁇ which is known to show a low value, the accuracy of the re-test necessity determination can be increased by using the medication information as the information regarding the diagnosis.
  • Information about the stage of medical treatment such as whether the disease name has not yet been determined, whether the disease name has been determined and the patient is undergoing treatment, and how much power has passed since the operation, may be used.
  • Laboratory values may fluctuate significantly before the disease name is determined or immediately after surgery, etc., but after the disease name is determined and treatment is started, or after a long time has passed since surgery, After the condition is stabilized, the fluctuation of the inspection value becomes small. By using such information, it is possible to increase the accuracy of the retest necessity determination using the change from the previous value.
  • Fig. 5 and Fig. 6 for the sake of simplicity, the determination of the necessity of retesting was described as an example of a linear evaluation between two items.However, various items such as single item check, previous value check, item check, etc. Method can be extended and used. Furthermore, reference values or logical formulas for judgment were set for each gender and age, but as in the above example, when using disease names as information on diagnosis, In addition, reference values and logical expressions may be set for each disease name. The age, gender, and disease name of the examinee are read from the diagnosis information 121 as the information related to the diagnosis, and the corresponding reference values and logical formulas are used to determine whether reexamination is necessary. It can be read from the value 1 18 to determine whether a retest is necessary.
  • the re-examination necessity logic 1 16 or the re-examination necessity reference value 1 18 is, for example, a standard value and a logical expression for each gender, age, and disease name in the format shown in Fig. 9. Record it.
  • the re-examination necessity determination logic 1 16 and the re-examination necessity determination reference value 1 18 are represented by parameters such as reference values used for re-examination necessity determination and logical expressions describing the determination logic. Recording each time can improve the accuracy of the retest necessity determination.
  • the retest reference value and the retest logic for ⁇ diagnostic name undetermined '' in advance may be performed using the retest reference value and the retest logic.
  • the retest reference values for all A determination using retest logic may be performed, and a retest reference value for at least one type of disease may be determined. If retest is not required in the determination using retest logic, retest may be determined to be unnecessary.
  • the patient is likely to be a disease corresponding to the retest reference value and retest logic when it is determined that retest is unnecessary, and as a result, the retest grave value for this disease and retest logic are judged to be unnecessary. It can be considered that it was done.
  • the disease candidate estimating process 124 shown in FIG. 4 is used to estimate the patient's disease name from the input test results and the like, and then correspond to the estimated disease name.
  • the retest necessity judgment processing may be performed using the retest reference value and the retest judgment logic. In this case, if no disease candidate is output, the input test value is considered to be incorrect, and it can be determined that the sample requires retesting.
  • a re-test necessity judgment As a process, a neural network that inputs the current test values, past test values, diagnostic information, etc., and outputs whether re-test is necessary or not may be used.
  • the reexamination necessity determination logic 1 16 records parameters describing the network structure such as the number of layers of the neural network, the number of elements in each layer, etc., the connection weight value between the elements, and the like. The network is configured based on the recorded information when the necessity of reexamination is determined.
  • fuzzy inference is used as the reexamination necessity determination logic, the membership function used for fuzzy inference is recorded in the reexamination necessity determination logic 1 16.
  • Judgment of reexamination necessity ⁇ The result of the judgment (step 2 05) is recorded in the reexamination necessity result 1 14, but information that is the basis of the reexamination necessity result is also recorded here. Good to keep.
  • the reason for the retest necessity judgment result is as follows: if it is determined that retest is necessary, why it was determined to be necessary, and if it was determined that retest was unnecessary, why it was determined to be unnecessary Is the information that is the basis for explaining.
  • Reasons for determining that retesting is necessary include, for example, inspection items and values that exceeded the reference value in the single item check, inspection items and values that exceeded the reference value in the previous value check, and inter-item check.
  • the basis for determining that retesting is unnecessary is based on the information that there is no abnormal value if there is no abnormal value (test value exceeding the reference value) in a single item check, for example.
  • the previous value for the test item indicating the abnormal value, or information on diagnosis such as a disease name can be used as a basis for the determination.
  • FIGS. 10 and 11 show screen configuration examples of displaying the inspection result and the re-examination necessity determination result on the display of the inspection client 40.
  • An example is shown in which the patient's consultation department 835, examination status 840, presence / absence of abnormal values 845, necessity of reexamination 850, etc. is displayed in a list format.
  • the test status 840 shows the progress of the tests by type of test: biochemical immunoassay (described as “bioimmune” in the figure) and general test (described as “general” in the figure). Is shown.
  • the above information is displayed as a list in order of the order number, but it is also possible to extract the information according to conditions. For example, by setting conditions for specific medical departments, patient names, presence / absence of abnormal values, necessity of re-examination, and extracting only rows that satisfy the conditions, it is possible to refer to the target information efficiently. .
  • FIG. 10 In the example of the screen configuration shown in FIG. 10, by operating a mouse or a keyboard attached to the inspection client 40 and selecting one of the lines, more detailed information on the line is displayed.
  • Fig. 11 shows a configuration example of the screen displayed at this time.
  • FIG. 11 shows an example of a screen configuration on the display 800 of the inspection client 40.
  • the screen consists of a basic patient information display area 860, an examination result display area 865, a re-examination necessity result display area 870, and a re-examination information input area 875.
  • the basic patient information display area 860 information about the patient, such as the patient ID, name, age, and gender, is displayed.
  • the inspection result display area 865 the current value, previous value, and previous values for each inspection item such as TP and Alb are displayed in a table format along with the inspection date.
  • the re-examination necessity judgment result display area 870 the judgment result on the necessity of the re-examination by the re-examination necessity judgment processing 113 is displayed, and the information as the basis for the judgment is displayed.
  • the reinspection execution information input area 8 7 5 the operator of the system uses the mouse, keyboard, etc. attached to the inspection client 40 to perform the reinspection (whether it was done or not). ) Can be selected and input.
  • the laboratory technician may refer to the test results for the sample that the system determines to need to be retested, and make a final decision as to whether the test is really necessary. If the necessary reexamination is automatically performed according to the necessity judgment result, the judgment made by the inspection technician can be omitted in many cases.
  • a re-examination necessity record that records the basis of the re-examination necessity is set. Result table By displaying the retest necessity judgment result and the basis of the retest necessity judgment in the display area 870, the technician determines which test value to focus on when making the final judgment. This allows the technician to make quick decisions.
  • the re-examination information entered in the re-examination information input area 875 is recorded in the re-examination information 112.
  • the re-test necessity determination logic optimization processing 1 1 7 is the test result recorded in the initial test result 1 1 1, the re-test execution information and the re-test result 1 1 5 recorded in the re-test execution information 1 1 2
  • rejection determination result 1 14 and the re-examination necessity determination logic 1 16 used in the re-examination necessity determination process 1 13 information is output to optimize the re-examination necessity determination logic 1 16.
  • optimize the reference values used in the conventional single-item check, previous value check, item-to-item check, etc .: ⁇ create a histogram of the inspection value distribution using the past inspection results recorded in the inspection result recording means.
  • a well-known optimization method is to use a range that includes 95% of the total value around the average value as a reference range.
  • the average value ⁇ and the standard deviation ⁇ of the inspection values are obtained, and the range ( ⁇ -1 ⁇ , + k ⁇ ) is used as a reference range. Where k is an appropriate constant.
  • such a method of setting a reference range does not use information as to what kind of test value the specimen that needs to be retested is.
  • the re-examination necessity determination process 113 when using a method other than the above, various optimal riding methods and learning methods corresponding to the respective methods may be used. For example, using the neural network as the re-test necessity judgment processing 1 1 3 ⁇ This is the test result 1 1 1 output The past test value to be read is used as learning data, and the re-test read from the re-test necessity judgment result 1 1 4 The information on whether or not the specimen is to be subjected to power is used as teacher data, and neural network learning can be performed. For example, when a feed-forward type network is used as a neural network, a pack propagation method can be used as a learning method.
  • the retest necessity determination can be considered as a pattern recognition problem in which a pattern using a test value as a feature quantity is classified into two types, a pattern that requires retest and a pattern that does not require retest.
  • various known pattern recognition methods can be used as the re-examination necessity determination method.
  • a variety of pattern recognition logic construction methods can be used. Therefore, for example, even when using fuzzy inference in the retest necessity decision 1 16, it is possible to optimize the inference method by using the test result and the corresponding retest necessity result. it can.
  • a known pattern recognition logic construction method it is possible to obtain an optimal logical expression by learning. In this way, by providing the initial inspection result 11 1 and the re-inspection result 1 15 and the re-inspection execution information 1 12, it is possible to optimize the re-inspection necessity determination logic as described above, The necessity determination accuracy can be improved.
  • the optimal logic of the reexamination logic is always executed in the flow of the reexamination
  • the user of the present system inputs the reexamination necessity determination logic change. It may be executed.
  • the system operator can change the retest necessity determination logic regardless of the retest result.
  • the retest reference value or the retest logic in Fig. 9 is updated using an input device. Optimizing the retest necessity determination logic using accumulated retest execution information and test results such as retest results for samples judged to be retested or retest results for some of the samples judged not to be retested As a result, the accuracy of the retest can be improved.

Landscapes

  • Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
  • Quality & Reliability (AREA)
  • Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • General Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
  • Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
  • Human Resources & Organizations (AREA)
  • Strategic Management (AREA)
  • Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
  • General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
  • Biochemistry (AREA)
  • General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
  • Operations Research (AREA)
  • Marketing (AREA)
  • Economics (AREA)
  • Life Sciences & Earth Sciences (AREA)
  • Chemical & Material Sciences (AREA)
  • Analytical Chemistry (AREA)
  • Tourism & Hospitality (AREA)
  • Data Mining & Analysis (AREA)
  • Immunology (AREA)
  • Pathology (AREA)
  • Epidemiology (AREA)
  • Medical Informatics (AREA)
  • Primary Health Care (AREA)
  • Public Health (AREA)
  • Medical Treatment And Welfare Office Work (AREA)
  • Automatic Analysis And Handling Materials Therefor (AREA)

Abstract

L'invention concerne un système d'examen clinique dans lequel il est déterminé automatiquement s'il est nécessaire de procéder à un réexamen, aux fins d'obtention de résultats de réexamen. Ce système consiste à optimiser une logique de détermination de la nécessité d'un réexamen, en utilisant des informations d'exécution de réexamen, lesquelles accumulent les résultats de réexamen de spécimens nécessitant un réexamen et d'une partie de spécimens ne nécessitant pas de réexamen, ainsi que les résultats de l'examen.
PCT/JP2001/005716 2000-07-05 2001-07-02 Systeme d'examen clinique WO2002003077A1 (fr)

Applications Claiming Priority (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
JP2000-208225 2000-07-05
JP2000208225A JP3987675B2 (ja) 2000-07-05 2000-07-05 臨床検査システム

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
WO2002003077A1 true WO2002003077A1 (fr) 2002-01-10

Family

ID=18704847

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
PCT/JP2001/005716 WO2002003077A1 (fr) 2000-07-05 2001-07-02 Systeme d'examen clinique

Country Status (2)

Country Link
JP (1) JP3987675B2 (fr)
WO (1) WO2002003077A1 (fr)

Cited By (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
CN103460055A (zh) * 2011-03-30 2013-12-18 希森美康株式会社 样本分析系统及样本分析装置
CN111816285A (zh) * 2019-04-10 2020-10-23 佳能医疗系统株式会社 医用信息处理装置及医用信息处理方法
CN112858702A (zh) * 2019-11-28 2021-05-28 深圳迈瑞生物医疗电子股份有限公司 基于样本检测的信息处理方法及样本检测系统和存储介质
WO2023172935A3 (fr) * 2022-03-09 2023-11-09 Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. Système et procédé de réglage dynamique de précision analytique dans des processus de diagnostic clinique

Families Citing this family (21)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
JP3760806B2 (ja) * 2001-06-25 2006-03-29 株式会社日立製作所 分析結果管理の方法および装置
JP4951216B2 (ja) * 2005-07-05 2012-06-13 シスメックス株式会社 臨床検査情報処理装置及びシステム、分析装置、並びに臨床検査情報処理用のプログラム
JP4805709B2 (ja) * 2006-03-30 2011-11-02 シスメックス株式会社 尿分析装置
JP4906431B2 (ja) 2006-08-04 2012-03-28 株式会社日立ハイテクノロジーズ 自動分析装置
JP5108366B2 (ja) * 2007-03-29 2012-12-26 シスメックス株式会社 検体分析装置
JP5106906B2 (ja) * 2007-04-05 2012-12-26 株式会社日立ハイテクノロジーズ 自動分析装置
EP2116851B1 (fr) * 2008-02-13 2018-09-19 Hitachi High-Technologies Corporation Analyseur automatique
JP5171368B2 (ja) * 2008-04-17 2013-03-27 株式会社日立ハイテクノロジーズ 自動分析装置
JP4951595B2 (ja) * 2008-07-31 2012-06-13 シスメックス株式会社 臨床検査情報処理装置、システム及び分析装置、並びにそれらのプログラム
JP4951594B2 (ja) * 2008-07-31 2012-06-13 シスメックス株式会社 臨床検査情報処理装置、システム及び分析装置、並びにそれらのプログラム
JP5452070B2 (ja) * 2009-04-28 2014-03-26 株式会社日立ハイテクノロジーズ 自動分析装置
WO2011037069A1 (fr) * 2009-09-28 2011-03-31 株式会社日立ハイテクノロジーズ Dispositif d'analyses automatiques, procédé d'affichage d'informations et associé système d'affichage d'informations
JP5570240B2 (ja) * 2010-02-22 2014-08-13 アークレイ株式会社 試料の分析処理におけるデータ出力方法、分析装置、分析システム、前記方法を実施するためのプログラム、およびこのプログラムの記憶媒体
US10845266B2 (en) 2011-11-16 2020-11-24 Inficon Gmbh Quick leak detection on dimensionally stable/slack packaging without the addition of test gas
JP5961424B2 (ja) * 2012-03-30 2016-08-02 シスメックス株式会社 検体分析装置、検体分析方法および検体分析システム
JP6169337B2 (ja) * 2012-09-03 2017-07-26 株式会社日立ハイテクノロジーズ 検体検査自動化システムおよび検体の搬送方法
JP6667991B2 (ja) * 2015-01-23 2020-03-18 キヤノンメディカルシステムズ株式会社 超音波診断装置及び病院情報システム
JP7075509B2 (ja) * 2019-02-05 2022-05-25 富士フイルム株式会社 管理システム
JP2021034056A (ja) * 2019-08-26 2021-03-01 エフ．ホフマン−ラ ロシュ アーゲーＦ． Ｈｏｆｆｍａｎｎ−Ｌａ Ｒｏｃｈｅ Ａｋｔｉｅｎｇｅｓｅｌｌｓｃｈａｆｔ 医療データの自動化された検証
JP7431709B2 (ja) * 2020-09-28 2024-02-15 株式会社日立ハイテク 自動分析装置
JP7534184B2 (ja) 2020-10-20 2024-08-14 合同会社Ｈ．Ｕ．グループ中央研究所 情報処理方法、情報処理システム及びプログラム

Citations (9)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
JPS6298262A (ja) * 1985-10-25 1987-05-07 Hitachi Ltd 臨床検査システムにおける再検査処理方式
JPH0310161A (ja) * 1989-06-08 1991-01-17 Hitachi Ltd 再検査指示方式
US5100622A (en) * 1989-03-14 1992-03-31 Hitachi, Ltd. Automatic analyzing apparatus and method for clinical examination
JPH04290963A (ja) * 1991-03-19 1992-10-15 Hitachi Ltd 自動分析装置のデータチェック装置
JPH05119042A (ja) * 1991-10-24 1993-05-14 Analytical Instr:Kk 自動分析システム
JPH07120471A (ja) * 1993-10-25 1995-05-12 Hitachi Ltd 自動分析装置
JPH11296605A (ja) * 1998-04-13 1999-10-29 Hitachi Ltd 臨床検査システム
JP2000074924A (ja) * 1998-08-27 2000-03-14 Hitachi Ltd 臨床検査システムの検査データ管理装置
JP3036667B2 (ja) * 1994-03-28 2000-04-24 株式会社日立情報システムズ 医療系検査室内データクリーン化システム

Patent Citations (9)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
JPS6298262A (ja) * 1985-10-25 1987-05-07 Hitachi Ltd 臨床検査システムにおける再検査処理方式
US5100622A (en) * 1989-03-14 1992-03-31 Hitachi, Ltd. Automatic analyzing apparatus and method for clinical examination
JPH0310161A (ja) * 1989-06-08 1991-01-17 Hitachi Ltd 再検査指示方式
JPH04290963A (ja) * 1991-03-19 1992-10-15 Hitachi Ltd 自動分析装置のデータチェック装置
JPH05119042A (ja) * 1991-10-24 1993-05-14 Analytical Instr:Kk 自動分析システム
JPH07120471A (ja) * 1993-10-25 1995-05-12 Hitachi Ltd 自動分析装置
JP3036667B2 (ja) * 1994-03-28 2000-04-24 株式会社日立情報システムズ 医療系検査室内データクリーン化システム
JPH11296605A (ja) * 1998-04-13 1999-10-29 Hitachi Ltd 臨床検査システム
JP2000074924A (ja) * 1998-08-27 2000-03-14 Hitachi Ltd 臨床検査システムの検査データ管理装置

Cited By (5)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
CN103460055A (zh) * 2011-03-30 2013-12-18 希森美康株式会社 样本分析系统及样本分析装置
CN103460055B (zh) * 2011-03-30 2016-01-13 希森美康株式会社 样本分析系统及样本分析装置
CN111816285A (zh) * 2019-04-10 2020-10-23 佳能医疗系统株式会社 医用信息处理装置及医用信息处理方法
CN112858702A (zh) * 2019-11-28 2021-05-28 深圳迈瑞生物医疗电子股份有限公司 基于样本检测的信息处理方法及样本检测系统和存储介质
WO2023172935A3 (fr) * 2022-03-09 2023-11-09 Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. Système et procédé de réglage dynamique de précision analytique dans des processus de diagnostic clinique

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
JP3987675B2 (ja) 2007-10-10
JP2002022748A (ja) 2002-01-23

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
WO2002003077A1 (fr) Systeme d'examen clinique
Junker et al. Point-of-care testing in hospitals and primary care
CN102749466B (zh) 用于自动检验实验室化验结果的系统和方法
Pham et al. Recognizing misclassification bias in research and medical practice
EP2280358A1 (fr) Gestionnaire de zone de travail d'urine et zone de travail d'urine
US20080114559A1 (en) Quality control system, analyzer, and quality control method
Hu et al. Automated detection of postoperative surgical site infections using supervised methods with electronic health record data
US20070027648A1 (en) Clinical testing information processing apparatus, clinical testing information processing method, and analyzing system
US20070150314A1 (en) Method for carrying out quality control of medical data records collected from different but comparable patient collectives within the bounds of a medical plan
CN106339569B (zh) 判断样本检验结果异常的方法及装置
JP2008117177A (ja) 健診情報入力システム
CN106250672A (zh) 在实验室结果的质量控制策略的分析中使用患者风险
US8812249B2 (en) Analyzer apparatus and methods for lung disease
RU106013U1 (ru) Система постановки дифференцированного диагноза по данным диагностики, справочная система результатов клинических исследований для интеграции в автоматизированные медицинские информационные системы, система дифференциации записи результатов клинических исследований для интеграции в автоматизированные медицинские информационные системы и дифференциально-диагностическая матрица для интеграции в автоматизированные медицинские информационные системы
CN111406294B (zh) 自动生成用于实验室仪器的规则
JP2007322243A (ja) 自動分析装置
Junger et al. Automatic calculation of a modified APACHE II score using a patient data management system (PDMS)
Crane et al. Diabetes case identification methods applied to electronic medical record systems: their use in HIV-infected patients
Briedigkeit et al. Recommendations of the German Working Group on medical laboratory testing (AML) on the introduction and quality assurance of procedures for point-of-care testing (POCT) in hospitals
JP2006031264A (ja) 臨床検査情報管理装置、臨床検査情報管理方法、および臨床検査情報管理プログラム
JP3982192B2 (ja) 臨床検査システム
CN109446192B (zh) 数据测试方法及装置
JP3036667B2 (ja) 医療系検査室内データクリーン化システム
JPH07103972A (ja) 生化学自動分析装置
JP3053902B2 (ja) 異常原因診断方法

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
AK Designated states

Kind code of ref document: A1

Designated state(s): CN KR US

AL Designated countries for regional patents

Kind code of ref document: A1

Designated state(s): AT BE CH CY DE DK ES FI FR GB GR IE IT LU MC NL PT SE TR

DFPE Request for preliminary examination filed prior to expiration of 19th month from priority date (pct application filed before 20040101)
121 Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application
122 Ep: pct application non-entry in european phase