| 1. |
- Lippi, Giuseppe, et al.
(author)
-
Preanalytical quality improvement : in quality we trust
- 2013
-
In: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. - : Walter de Gruyter. - 1434-6621 .- 1437-4331. ; 51:1, s. 229-241
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Total quality in laboratory medicine should be defined as the guarantee that each activity throughout the total testing process is correctly performed, providing valuable medical decision-making and effective patient care. In the past decades, a 10-fold reduction in the analytical error rate has been achieved thanks to improvements in both reliability and standardization of analytical techniques, reagents, and instrumentation. Notable advances in information technology, quality control and quality assurance methods have also assured a valuable contribution for reducing diagnostic errors. Nevertheless, several lines of evidence still suggest that most errors in laboratory diagnostics fall outside the analytical phase, and the pre- and postanalytical steps have been found to be much more vulnerable. This collective paper, which is the logical continuum of the former already published in this journal 2 years ago, provides additional contribution to risk management in the preanalytical phase and is a synopsis of the lectures of the 2nd European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM)-Becton Dickinson (BD) European Conference on Preanalytical Phase meeting entitled "Preanalytical quality improvement: in quality we trust" (Zagreb, Croatia, 1-2 March 2013). The leading topics that will be discussed include quality indicators for preanalytical phase, phlebotomy practices for collection of blood gas analysis and pediatric samples, lipemia and blood collection tube interferences, preanalytical requirements of urinalysis, molecular biology hemostasis and platelet testing, as well as indications on best practices for safe blood collection. Auditing of the preanalytical phase by ISO assessors and external quality assessment for preanalytical phase are also discussed.
|
|
| 2. |
- Simundic, Ana-Maria, et al.
(author)
-
Compliance of blood sampling procedures with the CLSI H3-A6 guidelines : an observational study by the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) working group for the preanalytical phase (WG-PRE)
- 2015
-
In: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. - : Walter de Gruyter. - 1434-6621 .- 1437-4331. ; 53:9, s. 1321-1331
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: An observational study was conducted in 12 European countries by the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase (EFLM WG-PRE) to assess the level of compliance with the CLSI H3-A6 guidelines. Methods: A structured checklist including 29 items was created to assess the compliance of European phlebotomy procedures with the CLSI H3-A6 guideline. A risk occurrence chart of individual phlebotomy steps was created from the observed error frequency and severity of harm of each guideline key issue. The severity of errors occurring during phlebotomy was graded using the risk occurrence chart. Results: Twelve European countries participated with a median of 33 (18-36) audits per country, and a total of 336 audits. The median error rate for the total phlebotomy procedure was 26.9 % (10.6-43.8), indicating a low overall compliance with the recommended CLSI guideline. Patient identification and test tube labelling were identified as the key guideline issues with the highest combination of probability and potential risk of harm. Administrative staff did not adhere to patient identification procedures during phlebotomy, whereas physicians did not adhere to test tube labelling policy. Conclusions: The level of compliance of phlebotomy procedures with the CLSI H3-A6 guidelines in 12 European countries was found to be unacceptably low. The most critical steps in need of immediate attention in the investigated countries are patient identification and tube labelling.
|
|
| 3. |
- Topic, Elizabeta, et al.
(author)
-
How to assess the quality of your analytical method?
- 2015
-
In: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. - : WALTER DE GRUYTER GMBH. - 1434-6621 .- 1437-4331. ; 53:11, s. 1707-1718
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Laboratory medicine is amongst the fastest growing fields in medicine, crucial in diagnosis, support of prevention and in the monitoring of disease for individual patients and for the evaluation of treatment for populations of patients. Therefore, high quality and safety in laboratory testing has a prominent role in high-quality healthcare. Applied knowledge and competencies of professionals in laboratory medicine increases the clinical value of laboratory results by decreasing laboratory errors, increasing appropriate utilization of tests, and increasing cost effectiveness. This collective paper provides insights into how to validate the laboratory assays and assess the quality of methods. It is a synopsis of the lectures at the 15th European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Continuing Postgraduate Course in Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine entitled "How to assess the quality of your method?" (Zagreb, Croatia, 24-25 October 2015). The leading topics to be discussed include who, what and when to do in validation/verification of methods, verification of imprecision and bias, verification of reference intervals, verification of qualitative test procedures, verification of blood collection systems, comparability of results among methods and analytical systems, limit of detection, limit of quantification and limit of decision, how to assess the measurement uncertainty, the optimal use of Internal Quality Control and External Quality Assessment data, Six Sigma metrics, performance specifications, as well as biological variation. This article, which continues the annual tradition of collective papers from the EFLM continuing postgraduate courses in clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine, aims to provide further contributions by discussing the quality of laboratory methods and measurements and, at the same time, to offer continuing professional development to the attendees.
|
|
