Literature DB >> 10071006

Quality assurance in molecular genetic testing laboratories.

M M McGovern1, M O Benach, S Wallenstein, R J Desnick, R Keenlyside.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Specific regulation of laboratories performing molecular genetic tests may be needed to ensure standards and quality assurance (QA) and safeguard patient rights to informed consent and confidentiality. However, comprehensive analysis of current practices of such laboratories, important for assessing the need for regulation and its impact on access to testing, has not been conducted.
OBJECTIVE: To collect and analyze data regarding availability of clinical molecular genetic testing, including personnel standards and laboratory practices.
DESIGN: A mail survey in June 1997 of molecular genetic testing laboratory directors and assignment of a QA score based on responses to genetic testing process items.
SETTING: Hospital-based, independent, and research-based molecular genetic testing laboratories in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Directors of molecular genetic testing laboratories (n = 245; response rate, 74.9%). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Laboratory process QA score, using the American College of Medical Genetics Laboratory Practice Committee standards.
RESULTS: The 245 responding laboratories reported availability of testing for 94 disorders. Personnel qualifications varied, although all directors had doctoral degrees. The mean QAscore was 90% (range, 44%-100%) with 36 laboratories (15%) scoring lower than 70%. Higher scores were associated with test menu size of more than 4 tests (P = .01), performance of more than 30 analyses annually (P = .01), director having a PhD vs MD degree (P = .002), director board certification (P = .03), independent (P <.001) and hospital (P = .01) laboratories vs research laboratory, participation in proficiency testing (P<.001), and Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendment certification (P = .006). Seventy percent of laboratories provided access to genetic counseling, 69% had a confidentiality policy, and 45% required informed consent prior to testing.
CONCLUSION: The finding that a number of laboratories had QA scores that may reflect suboptimal laboratory practices suggests that both personnel qualification and laboratory practice standards are most in need of improvement to ensure quality in clinical molecular genetic testing laboratories.

Entities:  

Keywords:  American College of Medical Genetics Laboratory Practice Committee Standards and Guidelines; Empirical Approach; Genetics and Reproduction

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10071006     DOI: 10.1001/jama.281.9.835

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  18 in total

1.  Monitoring quality requires knowing similarity: the NICLTS experience.

Authors:  S J Steindel; S E Granade
Journal:  Proc AMIA Symp       Date:  2001

Review 2.  NIST physical standards for DNA-based medical testing.

Authors:  Peter E Barker; Michael S Watson; John R Ticehurst; Jennifer C Colbert; Catherine D O'Connell
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 2.352

3.  Quality assurance practices in Europe: a survey of molecular genetic testing laboratories.

Authors:  Sarah Berwouts; Katrina Fanning; Michael A Morris; David E Barton; Elisabeth Dequeker
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2012-06-27       Impact factor: 4.246

4.  External quality assurance of molecular analysis of haemochromatosis gene mutations.

Authors:  M Hertzberg; S Neville; D McDonald
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2006-05-05       Impact factor: 3.411

5.  Development of a web-based query tool for quality assurance of clinical molecular genetic test results.

Authors:  Matthew J McGinniss; Rebecca Chen; Victoria M Pratt; Arlene Buller; Franklin Quan; Charles M Strom; Weimin Sun; Beryl Crossley
Journal:  J Mol Diagn       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 5.568

6.  Development of a rapid, reliable genetic test for pseudoxanthoma elasticum.

Authors:  Yanggu Shi; Sharon F Terry; Patrick F Terry; Lionel G Bercovitch; Gary F Gerard
Journal:  J Mol Diagn       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 5.568

Review 7.  A generic research paradigm for identification and validation of early molecular diagnostics and new therapeutics in common disorders.

Authors:  Keith D Coon; Travis L Dunckley; Dietrich A Stephan
Journal:  Mol Diagn Ther       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.074

Review 8.  Current landscape and new paradigms of proficiency testing and external quality assessment for molecular genetics.

Authors:  Lisa V Kalman; Ira M Lubin; Shannon Barker; Desiree du Sart; Rob Elles; Wayne W Grody; Mario Pazzagli; Sue Richards; Iris Schrijver; Barbara Zehnbauer
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 5.534

Review 9.  A review of consent practices and perspectives for pharmacogenetic testing.

Authors:  Susanne B Haga; Rachel Mills
Journal:  Pharmacogenomics       Date:  2016-08-17       Impact factor: 2.533

10.  Postal survey of physicians and laboratories: practices and perceptions of molecular oncology testing.

Authors:  Fiona A Miller; Paul Krueger; Robert J Christensen; Catherine Ahern; Ronald F Carter; Suzanne Kamel-Reid
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2009-07-30       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.