Julian H Barth1. 1. Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Leeds General Infirmary, Leeds, UK. julian.barth@leedsth.nhs.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinical outcomes are the current paradigm for assessing the performance of health institutions. In contrast, clinical laboratories are assessed on largely operational criteria. METHODS: An invitation to an online questionnaire was sent to all members of the Association for Clinical Biochemistry in the UK and Eire. All data were normalized to the total number of respondents irrespective of how many respondents answered each question. RESULTS: A total of 335 individuals responded to the survey. A further six responses were discarded as the respondents worked outside clinical laboratories. Overall responses showed that of the selected quality indicators, responses ranged from 7% to 84%. In general, although most laboratories provided an advisory and interpretative service, there was little evaluation and audit of this component of the service. The majority of respondents reported a written critical (alert) list and a hospital point-of-care committee. CONCLUSION: This survey has explored clinical quality indicators in the preanalytical, analytical and postanalytical phases of laboratory practice. This should act as a template for laboratory assessment and clinical quality improvement.
BACKGROUND: Clinical outcomes are the current paradigm for assessing the performance of health institutions. In contrast, clinical laboratories are assessed on largely operational criteria. METHODS: An invitation to an online questionnaire was sent to all members of the Association for Clinical Biochemistry in the UK and Eire. All data were normalized to the total number of respondents irrespective of how many respondents answered each question. RESULTS: A total of 335 individuals responded to the survey. A further six responses were discarded as the respondents worked outside clinical laboratories. Overall responses showed that of the selected quality indicators, responses ranged from 7% to 84%. In general, although most laboratories provided an advisory and interpretative service, there was little evaluation and audit of this component of the service. The majority of respondents reported a written critical (alert) list and a hospital point-of-care committee. CONCLUSION: This survey has explored clinical quality indicators in the preanalytical, analytical and postanalytical phases of laboratory practice. This should act as a template for laboratory assessment and clinical quality improvement.