Sök artiklar i SveMed+

Observera: SveMed+ upphör att uppdateras!



Laboratorieutrustning för primärvården bör utprövas av oberoende organ. Skandinaviska SKUP ett bra alternativ
Engelsk titel: Laboratory equipment for primary health care should be tested by independent authorities. Scandinavian SKUP is a good alternative Läs online Författare: Sandberg S ; Nordin G ; Mårtensson A ; Grinsted P ; Jensen E ; Jacobsen CE ; Monsen G Språk: Swe Antal referenser: 9 Dokumenttyp: Artikel UI-nummer: 08111416

Tidskrift

Läkartidningen 2008;105(46)3334-9 ISSN 0023-7205 E-ISSN 1652-7518 KIBs bestånd av denna tidskrift Denna tidskrift är expertgranskad (Peer-Reviewed)

Sammanfattning

It is difficult for users in primary health care to get good and objective information about equipment for office laboratories. In1997 SKUP started. Manufacturers can request objective evaluation after standardized protocols where equipment will be evaluated both under standardized conditions e.g. in a hospital laboratory by a laboratory technologist and by users of the test, at the doctors office or by patients. The results from the evaluations are always made public if the equipment is marketed in Scandinavia. More than 60 evaluations of equipment meant for primary care or patient self-testing have been performed by SKUP. Five of the evaluations are confidential since the equipment is not marketed in Scandinavia whereas seven evaluations have been stopped due to poor quality of the equipment. The evaluations are published at www.skup.nu. More than 50% of the equipment used in the primary care has been evaluated by SKUP. The SKUP- evaluations have resulted in that just a selection of better laboratory equipment for the primary care is marketed in Scandinavia, and that it is easier for the users to obtain objective information about laboratory equipment. Use of SKUP-evaluated equipment should a requirement for all government financed laboratory tests, and the evaluations should ideally be financed by the Government or by the manufacturers. Since this is not the case today, it is the supplier that decides if the equipment he sells is evaluated.