Article Text

Routine failures in the process for blood testing and the communication of results to patients in primary care in the UK: a qualitative exploration of patient and provider perspectives
  1. Ian Litchfield1,
  2. Louise Bentham1,
  3. Ann Hill2,
  4. Richard J McManus3,
  5. Richard Lilford4,
  6. Sheila Greenfield1
  1. 1School of Health and Population Sciences, Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
  2. 2Department of Transformation, Worcestershire Acute Hospitals, Worcestershire, UK
  3. 3Nuffield Department Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
  4. 4Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Ian Litchfield, School of Health and Population Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK; litchfii{at}


Background The testing and result communication process in primary care is complex. Its successful completion relies on the coordinated efforts of a range of staff in primary care and external settings working together with patients. Despite the importance of diagnostic testing in provision of care, this complexity renders the process vulnerable in the face of increasing demand, stretched resources and a lack of supporting guidance.

Methods We conducted a series of focus groups with patients and staff across four primary care practices using process-improvement strategies to identify and understand areas where either unnecessary delay is introduced, or the process may fail entirely. We then worked with both patients and staff to arrive at practical strategies to improve the current system.

Results A total of six areas across the process were identified where improvements could be introduced. These were: (1) delay in phlebotomy, (2) lack of a fail-safe to ensure blood tests are returned to practices and patients, (3) difficulties in accessing results by telephone, (4) role of non-clinical staff in communicating results, (5) routine communication of normal results and (6) lack of a protocol for result communication.

Conclusions A number of potential failures in testing and communicating results to patients were identified, and some specific ideas for improving existing systems emerged. These included same-day phlebotomy sessions, use of modern technology methods to proactively communicate routine results and targeted training for receptionists handling sensitive data. There remains an urgent need for further work to test these and other potential solutions.

  • General practice
  • Healthcare quality improvement
  • Patient-centred care

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See:

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Supplementary materials

  • Supplementary Data

    This web only file has been produced by the BMJ Publishing Group from an electronic file supplied by the author(s) and has not been edited for content.

Linked Articles