Wireless SOC testing: Can RF testing costs be reduced?

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Kafton
Keyword(s):  
Soc Testing ◽  
Rf Testing ◽  
Testing Costs

Integrating Epidemiological Information into MRI Reports Reduces Ensuing Radiologic Testing Costs Among Patients with Low Back Pain: A Controlled Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (6) ◽  
pp. 365-368
Author(s):  
William B. Weeks ◽  
Jason Pike ◽  
Christopher J. Schaeffer ◽  
Mathew J. Devine ◽  
John M. Ventura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Epidemiological Information ◽  
Testing Costs

High-Power RF Testing of 1-MW, 352.2-MHz Continuous Wave Klystron Amplifier

2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (10) ◽  
pp. 3599-3607 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manmath Kumar Badapanda ◽  
Akhilesh Tripathi ◽  
Rinki Upadhyay ◽  
Mahendra Lad ◽  
Pundalik R. Hannurkar
Keyword(s):  
High Power ◽  
Continuous Wave ◽  
Rf Testing

scholarly journals Clinical Ordering Practices of the SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Test at a Large Academic Medical Center

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joesph R Wiencek ◽  
Carter L Head ◽  
Costi D Sifri ◽  
Andrew S Parsons
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Antibody Test ◽  
The United States ◽  
Molecular Testing ◽  
Antibody Testing ◽  
Academic Medical ◽  
Public Health Epidemiology ◽  
Testing Costs

Abstract Background The novel severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) originated in December 2019 and has now infected almost 5 million people in the United States. In the spring of 2020, private laboratories and some hospitals began antibody testing despite limited evidence-based guidance. Methods We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients who received SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing from May 14, 2020, to June 15, 2020, at a large academic medical center, 1 of the first in the United States to provide antibody testing capability to individual clinicians in order to identify clinician-described indications for antibody testing compared with current expert-based guidance from the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Results Of 444 individual antibody test results, the 2 most commonly described testing indications, apart from public health epidemiology studies (n = 223), were for patients with a now resolved COVID-19-compatible illness (n = 105) with no previous molecular testing and for asymptomatic patients believed to have had a past exposure to a person with COVID-19-compatible illness (n = 60). The rate of positive SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing among those indications consistent with current IDSA and CDC guidance was 17% compared with 5% (P < .0001) among those indications inconsistent with such guidance. Testing inconsistent with current expert-based guidance accounted for almost half of testing costs. Conclusions Our findings demonstrate a dissociation between clinician-described indications for testing and expert-based guidance and a significantly different rate of positive testing between these 2 groups. Clinical curiosity and patient preference appear to have played a significant role in testing decisions and substantially contributed to testing costs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document