| 1. |
- Cadamuro, Janne, et al.
(författare)
-
European survey on preanalytical sample handling - Part 1 : How do European laboratories monitor the preanalytical phase? On behalf of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE)
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Biochemia Medica. - : Croatian Society of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine. - 1330-0962 .- 1846-7482. ; 29:2
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction: Compared to other activities of the testing process, the preanalytical phase is plagued by a lower degree of standardization, which makes it more vulnerable to errors. With the aim of providing guidelines and recommendations, the EFLM WG-PRE issued a survey across European medical laboratories, to gather information on local preanalytical practices. This is part one of two coherent articles, which covers all practices on monitoring preanalytical quality except haemolysis, icterus and lipemia (HIL).Materials and methods: An online survey, containing 39 questions dealing with a broad spectrum of preanalytical issues, was disseminated to EFLM member countries. The survey included questions on willingness of laboratories to engage in preanalytical issues.Results: Overall, 1405 valid responses were received from 37 countries. 1265 (94%) responders declared to monitor preanalytical errors. Assessment, documentation and further use of this information varied widely among respondents and partially among countries. Many responders were interested in a preanalytical online platform, holding information on various aspects of the preanalytical phase (N = 1177; 87%), in a guideline for measurement and evaluation of preanalytical variables (N = 1235; 92%), and in preanalytical e-learning programs or webinars (N = 1125; 84%). Fewer responders were interested in, or already participating in, preanalytical EQA programs (N = 951; 71%).Conclusion: Although substantial heterogeneity was found across European laboratories on preanalytical phase monitoring, the interest in preanalytical issues was high. A large majority of participants indicated an interest in new guidelines regarding preanalytical variables and learning activities. This important data will be used by the WG-PRE for providing recommendations on the most critical issues.
|
|
| 2. |
- Cadamuro, Janne, et al.
(författare)
-
European survey on preanalytical sample handling - Part 2 : Practices of European laboratories on monitoring and processing haemolytic, icteric and lipemic samples. On behalf of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE)
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Biochemia Medica. - : Croatian Society of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine. - 1330-0962 .- 1846-7482. ; 29:2
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction: No guideline currently exists on how to detect or document haemolysis, icterus or lipemia (HIL) in blood samples, nor on subsequent use of this information. The EFLM WG-PRE has performed a survey for assessing current practices of European laboratories in HIL monitoring. This second part of two coherent articles is focused on HIL.Materials and methods: An online survey, containing 39 questions on preanalytical issues, was disseminated among EFLM member countries. Seventeen questions exclusively focused on assessment, management and follow-up actions of HIL in routine blood samples.Results: Overall, 1405 valid responses from 37 countries were received. A total of 1160 (86%) of all responders stating to analyse blood samples - monitored HIL. HIL was mostly checked in clinical chemistry samples and less frequently in those received for coagulation, therapeutic drug monitoring and serology/infectious disease testing. HIL detection by automatic HIL indices or visual inspection, along with haemolysis cut-offs definition, varied widely among responders. A quarter of responders performing automated HIL checks used internal quality controls. In haemolytic/icteric/lipemic samples, most responders (70%) only rejected HIL-sensitive parameters, whilst about 20% released all test results with general comments. Other responders did not analysed but rejected the entire sample, while some released all tests, without comments. Overall, 26% responders who monitored HIL were using this information for monitoring phlebotomy or sample transport quality.Conclusion: Strategies for monitoring and treating haemolytic, icteric or lipemic samples are quite heterogeneous in Europe. The WG-PRE will use these insights for developing and providing recommendations aimed at harmonizing strategies across Europe.
|
|
| 3. |
- Cadamuro, Janne, et al.
(författare)
-
Preanalytical quality improvement - an interdisciplinary journey, on behalf of the European Federation for Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE)
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. - : Walter de Gruyter. - 1434-6621 .- 1437-4331. ; 60:5, s. 662-668
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Since the beginning of laboratory medicine, the main focus was to provide high quality analytics. Over time the importance of the extra-analytical phases and their contribution to the overall quality became evident. However, as the initial preanalytical processes take place outside of the laboratory and mostly without its supervision, all professions participating in these process steps, from test selection to sample collection and transport, need to engage accordingly. Focusing solely on intra-laboratory processes will not be sufficient to achieve the best possible preanalytical quality. The Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE) of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) has provided several recommendations, opinion papers and scientific evidence over the past years, aiming to standardize the preanalytical phase across Europe. One of its strategies to reach this goal are educational efforts. As such, the WG-PRE has organized five conferences in the past decade with the sole focus on preanalytical quality. This year's conference mainly aims to depict the views of different professions on preanalytical processes in order to acquire common ground as basis for further improvements. This article summarizes the content of this 6th preanalytical conference.
|
|
| 4. |
- Cornes, Michael, et al.
(författare)
-
Blood sampling guidelines with focus on patient safety and identification : a review
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Diagnosis. - : Walter de Gruyter. - 2194-8011 .- 2194-802X. ; 6:1, s. 33-37
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- It has been well documented over recent years that the preanalytical phase is a leading contributor to errors in the total testing process (TTP). There has however been great progress made in recent years due to the exponential growth of working groups specialising in the field. Patient safety is clearly at the forefront of any healthcare system and any reduction in errors at any stage will improve patient safety. Venous blood collection is a key step in the TTP, and here we review the key errors that occur in venous phlebotomy process and summarise the evidence around their significance to patient safety. Recent studies have identified that patient identification and tube labelling are the steps that carry the highest risk with regard to patient safety. Other studies have shown that in 16.1% of cases, patient identification is incorrectly performed and that 56% of patient identification errors are due to poor labelling practice. We recommend that patient identification must be done using open questions and ideally three separate pieces of information. Labelling of the tube or linking the identity of the patient to the tube label electronically must be done in the presence of the patient whether it is before or after sampling. Combined this will minimise any chance of patient misidentification.
|
|
| 5. |
- Cornes, Michael, et al.
(författare)
-
Order of blood draw : Opinion Paper by the European Federation for Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE)
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. - : Walter de Gruyter GmbH. - 1434-6621 .- 1437-4331. ; 55:1, s. 27-31
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- It has been well reported over recent years that most errors within the total testing process occur in the pre-analytical phase (46%-68.2%), an area that is usually outside of the direct control of the laboratory and which includes sample collection (phlebotomy). National and international (WHO, CLSI) guidelines recommend that the order of draw of blood during phlebotomy should be blood culture/sterile tubes, then plain tubes/gel tubes, then tubes containing additives. This prevents contamination of sample tubes with additives from previous tubes that could cause erroneous results. There have been a number of studies recently looking at whether order of draw remains a problem with modern phlebotomy techniques and materials, or it is an outdated practice followed simply because of historical reasons. In the following article, the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase (EFLM WG-PRE) provides an overview and summary of the literature with regards to order of draw in venous blood collection. Given the evidence presented in this article, the EFLM WG-PRE herein concludes that a significant frequency of sample contamination does occur if order of draw is not followed during blood collection and when performing venipuncture under less than ideal circumstances, thus putting patient safety at risk. Moreover, given that order of draw is not difficult to follow and knowing that ideal phlebotomy conditions and protocols are not always followed or possible, EFLM WG-PRE supports the continued recommendation of ensuring a correct order of draw for venous blood collection.
|
|
| 6. |
- Cornes, Michael P., et al.
(författare)
-
The role of European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Working Group for Preanalytical Phase in standardization and harmonization of the preanalytical phase in Europe
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Annals of Clinical Biochemistry. - : SAGE Publications. - 0004-5632 .- 1758-1001. ; 53:5, s. 539-547
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Patient safety is a leading challenge in healthcare and from the laboratory perspective it is now well established that preanalytical errors are the major contributor to the overall rate of diagnostic and therapeutic errors. To address this, the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (EFLM WG-PRE) was established to lead in standardization and harmonization of preanalytical policies and practices at a European level. One of the key activities of the WG-PRE is the organization of the biennial EFLM-BD conference on the preanalytical phase to provide a forum for National Societies (NS) to discuss their issues. Since 2012, a year after the first Preanalytical phase conference, there has been a rapid growth in the number of NS with a working group engaged in preanalytical phase activities and there are now at least 19 countries that have one. As a result of discussions with NS at the third conference held in March 2015 five key areas were identified as requiring harmonisation. These were test ordering, sample transport and storage, patient preparation, sampling procedures and management of unsuitable specimens. The article below summarises the work that has and will be done in these areas. The goal of this initiative is to ensure the EFLM WG-PRE produces work that meets the needs of the European laboratory medicine community. Progress made in the identified areas will be updated at the next preanalytical phase conference and show that we have produced guidance that has enhanced standardisation in the preanalytical phase and improved patient safety throughout Europe.
|
|
| 7. |
- Haas, Lenneke E M, et al.
(författare)
-
Frailty is associated with long-term outcome in patients with sepsis who are over 80 years old : results from an observational study in 241 European ICUs
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Age and Ageing. - : Oxford University Press. - 0002-0729 .- 1468-2834. ; 50:5, s. 1719-1727
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Sepsis is one of the most frequent reasons for acute intensive care unit (ICU) admission of very old patients and mortality rates are high. However, the impact of pre-existing physical and cognitive function on long-term outcome of ICU patients ≥ 80 years old (very old intensive care patients (VIPs)) with sepsis is unclear.OBJECTIVE: To investigate both the short- and long-term mortality of VIPs admitted with sepsis and assess the relation of mortality with pre-existing physical and cognitive function.DESIGN: Prospective cohort study.SETTING: 241 ICUs from 22 European countries in a six-month period between May 2018 and May 2019.SUBJECTS: Acutely admitted ICU patients aged ≥80 years with sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score ≥ 2.METHODS: Sepsis was defined according to the sepsis 3.0 criteria. Patients with sepsis as an admission diagnosis were compared with other acutely admitted patients. In addition to patients' characteristics, disease severity, information about comorbidity and polypharmacy and pre-existing physical and cognitive function were collected.RESULTS: Out of 3,596 acutely admitted VIPs with SOFA score ≥ 2, a group of 532 patients with sepsis were compared to other admissions. Predictors for 6-month mortality were age (per 5 years): Hazard ratio (HR, 1.16 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.09-1.25, P < 0.0001), SOFA (per one-point): HR, 1.16 (95% CI, 1.14-1.17, P < 0.0001) and frailty (CFS > 4): HR, 1.34 (95% CI, 1.18-1.51, P < 0.0001).CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial long-term mortality in VIPs admitted with sepsis. Frailty, age and disease severity were identified as predictors of long-term mortality in VIPs admitted with sepsis.
|
|
| 8. |
- Ibarz, Mercedes, et al.
(författare)
-
Sepsis at ICU admission does not decrease 30-day survival in very old patients : a post-hoc analysis of the VIP1 multinational cohort study
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Annals of Intensive Care. - : Springer. - 2110-5820. ; 10:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: The number of intensive care patients aged ≥ 80 years (Very old Intensive Care Patients; VIPs) is growing. VIPs have high mortality and morbidity and the benefits of ICU admission are frequently questioned. Sepsis incidence has risen in recent years and identification of outcomes is of considerable public importance. We aimed to determine whether VIPs admitted for sepsis had different outcomes than those admitted for other acute reasons and identify potential prognostic factors for 30-day survival.RESULTS: This prospective study included VIPs with Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores ≥ 2 acutely admitted to 307 ICUs in 21 European countries. Of 3869 acutely admitted VIPs, 493 (12.7%) [53.8% male, median age 83 (81-86) years] were admitted for sepsis. Sepsis was defined according to clinical criteria; suspected or demonstrated focus of infection and SOFA score ≥ 2 points. Compared to VIPs admitted for other acute reasons, VIPs admitted for sepsis were younger, had a higher SOFA score (9 vs. 7, p < 0.0001), required more vasoactive drugs [82.2% vs. 55.1%, p < 0.0001] and renal replacement therapies [17.4% vs. 9.9%; p < 0.0001], and had more life-sustaining treatment limitations [37.3% vs. 32.1%; p = 0.02]. Frailty was similar in both groups. Unadjusted 30-day survival was not significantly different between the two groups. After adjustment for age, gender, frailty, and SOFA score, sepsis had no impact on 30-day survival [HR 0.99 (95% CI 0.86-1.15), p = 0.917]. Inverse-probability weight (IPW)-adjusted survival curves for the first 30 days after ICU admission were similar for acute septic and non-septic patients [HR: 1.00 (95% CI 0.87-1.17), p = 0.95]. A matched-pair analysis in which patients with sepsis were matched with two control patients of the same gender with the same age, SOFA score, and level of frailty was also performed. A Cox proportional hazard regression model stratified on the matched pairs showed that 30-day survival was similar in both groups [57.2% (95% CI 52.7-60.7) vs. 57.1% (95% CI 53.7-60.1), p = 0.85].CONCLUSIONS: After adjusting for organ dysfunction, sepsis at admission was not independently associated with decreased 30-day survival in this multinational study of 3869 VIPs. Age, frailty, and SOFA score were independently associated with survival.
|
|
| 9. |
- Jung, Christian, et al.
(författare)
-
A comparison of very old patients admitted to intensive care unit after acute versus elective surgery or intervention
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Journal of critical care. - : W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC. - 0883-9441 .- 1557-8615. ; 52, s. 141-148
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: We aimed to evaluate differences in outcome between patients admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) after elective versus acute surgery in a multinational cohort of very old patients (80 years; VIP). Predictors of mortality, with special emphasis on frailty, were assessed.Methods: In total, 5063 VIPs were induded in this analysis, 922 were admitted after elective surgery or intervention, 4141 acutely, with 402 after acute surgery. Differences were calculated using Mann-Whitney-U test and Wilcoxon test. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression were used to assess associations with mortality.Results: Compared patients admitted after acute surgery, patients admitted after elective surgery suffered less often from frailty as defined as CFS (28% vs 46%; p < 0.001), evidenced lower SOFA scores (4 +/- 5 vs 7 +/- 7; p < 0.001). Presence of frailty (CFS >4) was associated with significantly increased mortality both in elective surgery patients (7% vs 12%; p = 0.01), in acute surgery (7% vs 12%; p = 0.02).Conclusions: VIPs admitted to ICU after elective surgery evidenced favorable outcome over patients after acute surgery even after correction for relevant confounders. Frailty might be used to guide clinicians in risk stratification in both patients admitted after elective and acute surgery.
|
|
| 10. |
- Lippi, Giuseppe, et al.
(författare)
-
Preanalytical quality improvement. In pursuit of harmony, on behalf of European Federation for Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE)
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. - : Walter de Gruyter GmbH. - 1434-6621 .- 1437-4331. ; 53:3, s. 357-370
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Laboratory diagnostics develop through different phases that span from test ordering (pre-preanalytical phase), collection of diagnostic specimens (preanalytical phase), sample analysis (analytical phase), results reporting (postanalytical phase) and interpretation (post-postanalytical phase). Although laboratory medicine seems less vulnerable than other clinical and diagnostic areas, the chance of errors is not negligible and may adversely impact on quality of testing and patient safety. This article, which continues a biennial tradition of collective papers on preanalytical quality improvement, is aimed to provide further contributions for pursuing quality and harmony in the preanalytical phase, and is a synopsis of lectures of the third European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM)-Becton Dickinson (BD) European Conference on Preanalytical Phase meeting entitled 'Preanalytical quality improvement. In pursuit of harmony' (Porto, 20-21 March 2015). The leading topics that will be discussed include unnecessary laboratory testing, management of test request, implementation of the European Union (EU) Directive on needlestick injury prevention, harmonization of fasting requirements for blood sampling, influence of physical activity and medical contrast media on in vitro diagnostic testing, recent evidence about the possible lack of necessity of the order of draw, the best practice for monitoring conditions of time and temperature during sample transportation, along with description of problems emerging from inappropriate sample centrifugation. In the final part, the article includes recent updates about preanalytical quality indicators, the feasibility of an External Quality Assessment Scheme (EQAS) for the preanalytical phase, the results of the 2nd EFLM WG-PRE survey, as well as specific notions about the evidence-based quality management of the preanalytical phase.
|
|
